Letters to the president,
address changes,
subscription requests, orders for NFB literature,
articles for the Monitor, and letters to the editor
should be sent to the National Office.

Monitor
subscriptions cost theFederation about twenty-five dollars
per year.
Members are invited, and non-members are requested, to cover
the subscription cost. Donations should be made payable to National Federation of the Blind and sent to:

MR.
GERSTENBERGER LEAVES EMPLOYMENT WITH THE NATIONAL FEDERATION OF THE BLIND

by Kenneth Jernigan

I first met Mr. Gerstenberger in 1973
when I employed him as a librarian at the Iowa Commission for
the Blind. Shortly after the National Center for the Blind was established
in Baltimore, he left Iowa to take employment with the
Federation. During the last few years he has served as our Executive
Director. As of January 31, 1997, he is resigning to move to
the state of Washington. These are the unadorned facts, but they
do not convey the closeness that many of us in the Federation
have with Mr. Gerstenberger. He is part of the inner
core of our movement.

Though sighted, he understands, believes,
and lives our philosophy on a daily basis. He is more
than an employee or colleague. He is as dedicated to our
cause and as committed to our effort as any member we have.

On a personal note, I trust and rely
on Mr. Gerstenberger to the ultimate. That will not change as
he leaves formal employment with the Federation. He will be in New
Orleans this summer, supervising the exhibit hall as usual.

[PHOTO/CAPTION: Marc Maurer]

A MATTER
OF PERSPECTIVE:
DISCRIMINATION IN THE COURTS

by Marc Maurer

Cheryl Fischer is a blind woman in her
thirties living in Ohio. Eight years ago she applied for admission
to Case Western Reserve medical school. Her grades justified
the application. The medical school apparently considered the application
with caution, suspicion, and fear. Rather than permitting
the application to be considered in the usual customary process,
the medical school established a separate committee to review
the application and to determine whether it would be accepted
or rejected. The members of the special ad hoc admission committee
interviewed Cheryl Fischer; they expressed their belief
that no blind person could be a doctor; and they rejected the application.

If the ad hoc admissions committee of
the school is correct, the decision they reached is fair, rational,
and prudent. If it is incorrect, the decision is a case
of discrimination. Cheryl Fischer said that her purpose
in matriculating at the medical school was to become a psychiatrist.
She is not the first blind person who has sought to participate
in this profession. There are blind people practicing psychiatry
today. However, this is not the only medical profession in
which the blind are participants.

In the late 1960's I met a dentist who
had become blind. He was serving as a medical officer for the city of Omaha,
Nebraska. His duties included the design and implementation of educational programs
to assist school children and personnel in the city to increase their dental
health. Before I met this dentist, I would have been absolutely certain that
no blind person could participate in the dental profession in any way. And,
of course, I would have been completely wrong.

I suspect it is fair to say that most
human beings feel reluctant to permit blind people to enter
the medical profession or practice in it. The reaction is heartfelt
and personal--I don't want some blind doctor cutting
on me! However, this reaction ignores a fundamental reality.
It is not vision that makes a good doctor but mental capacity,
experience, and the proper caring spirit.

There have been dozens of blind people
in the medical profession. Most of these practitioners
learned the technicalities of medical practice before
they became blind. However, Dr. David Hartman attended medical
school at Temple University as a blind student.

In the late 70's and early 80's a practitioner
of family medicine in Louisiana, Dr. Spencer Lewis,
lost his sight. Despite his blindness Dr. Lewis's patients continued
to seek medical services from him. Dr. Lewis performed
well as a doctor. For example, he delivered a child for one
of the long-time leaders in the Federation, Joanne Wilson.

When Dr. Lewis lost his sight, the Louisiana
Medical Board decided that his license to practice
medicine should be revoked. However, Dr. Lewis's patients felt trust
and confidence in him. They did not want to lose his services.
With the help of the National Federation of the Blind, Dr.
Lewis fought to retain his license, and he won.

This brings us back to the Cheryl Fischer
case, which began in 1988. When her application to attend
Case Western Reserve medical school was rejected, Cheryl Fischer filed
a complaint of discrimination with the Ohio Civil Rights
Commission. After considering the evidence, the Commission
issued a decision in favor of Cheryl Fischer. The medical
school appealed to the Ohio courts. The trial court considered the
case and agreed with the Civil Rights Commission--discrimination
had occurred against Cheryl Fischer, the judge said. Once
again the school appealed. The appeals court reversed the decision
of the trial court, and the case was sent to the Supreme Court
of Ohio.

In the decision which was reached in
Ohio's highest court, there are two classically different methods
of approach. The four-judge majority that decided against
Cheryl Fischer concentrated on individual details. These
judges explained a beyond the capacity of any blind person.
They said that a blind student cannot read an X-ray or "observe"
the patient. They said that the use of an assistant to read
the X-ray or describe the coloring of the patient is an inadequate
substitute for the personal observation of the physician.
These four judges concluded that the decision of the ad
hoc admissions committee of Case Western Reserve medical school was
correct--no blind person possesses the capacity to perform adequately
as a medical student or a doctor, they said.

The other three judges on the Ohio Supreme
Court dissented. These judges took a completely different approach. They said
that prejudging an individual without permitting that person to try is prejudice
and that declaring an entire class to be ineligible based on the characteristic
of that class, without first examining the individuals who make up the class,
is the most classic sort of discriminatory behavior. In the specific instance
of Cheryl Fischer they pointed out that she was not offered the opportunity
to try. It was determined that her efforts would be inadequate regardless of
her skills, regardless of her performance, regardless of her mental capacity,
and regardless of the techniques she might employ. This is unacceptable under
the law because it is discriminatory, they said.

It will come as no surprise to readers
of the Braille Monitor that I agree with the dissenting judges.
Discrimination has occurred in the Cheryl Fischer case.
It occurred in the admissions process at Case Western Reserve
University; it occurred in the decision-making process
of the ad hoc admissions committee; it occurred in the Court of
Appeals; and it occurred in the Ohio Supreme Court. Although we
made an effort to present to the court the case for the capacity
of blind people, our efforts were unsuccessful. The prejudice
against blindness in the minds of the Supreme Court judges in
Ohio prevailed.

However, this decision is not the last
word on the opportunity for blind people to participate in medical
school and the medical profession. Prejudice can be overcome
with determination and education. We will raise the matter again.
The prejudice which exists against blind people may be widespread,
but it is less today than it was when the National Federation
of the Blind came into being in 1940. The Cheryl Fischer
case has been lost, but there will be another case. Sooner or
later we will win. We believe in what we do, and we cannot
be discouraged by a temporary setback--no matter how dramatic
it may appear. Although we occasionally lose skirmishes and we
sometimes lose battles, we never lose a war because the war is never
over until we win. Here is the opinion of the Ohio Supreme
Court. And, of more importance, here also is the dissenting
opinion of that court.

1. A prima facie case of discrimination
in education under R.C. 4112.022(A) includes three elements:
(1) the plaintiff is a handicapped person within the meaning
of R.C. 4112.01(A)(13); (2) the plaintiff is otherwise qualified
to participate in the program; and (3) the plaintiff is being
excluded from the program on the basis of a handicap.

2. An "otherwise qualified"
handicapped person is one who is able to safely and substantially perform an
educational program's essential requirements with reasonable
accommodation. An accommodation is not reasonable where
it requires fundamental alterations in the essential nature of
the program or imposes an undue financial or administrative
burden.

Plaintiff-appellant, Cheryl A. Fischer
("Fischer"), completely lost her vision during her junior year
of undergraduate study at CWRU. To accommodate Fischer's handicap
while she pursued a chemistry degree, CWRU provided Fischer
with lab assistants and readers, modified the written exams to
oral ones, and extended the time periods in which to take exams.
Fischer also used a closed circuit television to magnify
images before she totally lost her sight and books on tape to assist
her. Thus, in spite of her handicap, Fischer successfully completed
all of CWRU's academic requirements and received her
baccalaureate degree, cum laude, in 1987.

[PHOTO/CAPTION: Cheryl Fischer]

Following graduation, Fischer sought
admission to medical school. All medical colleges in the United
States belong to the Association of American Medical Colleges
("AAMC"). In January, 1979, the AAMC adopted the "Report
of the Special Advisory Panel on Technical Standards for Medical School
Admission." The AAMC Technical Standards Report requires candidates
for a medical school degree to have the ability to
observe. Specifically, the report states, "[t]he candidate
must be able to observe demonstrations and experiments in the
basic sciences. . . . A candidate must be able to observe a patient
accurately at a distance and close at hand. Observation
necessitates the functional use of the sense of vision
and somatic sensation." The Technical Report further states, "a
candidate should be able to perform in a reasonably independent manner.
The use of a trained intermediary means that a candidate's
judgment must be mediated by someone else's power of selection
and observation." Although medical colleges are not required to
follow the Technical Standards Report, the AAMC encouraged
medical schools to use it as a guideline in developing their own
standards.

In 1987 Cheryl applied to the medical
school at CWRU.1 CWRU used the AAMC Technical Standards Report as a guideline
in evaluating the four thousand to five thousand preliminary applications received
annually for a class total of one hundred thirty-eight.2 Due to Fischer's sufficient
academic credentials and extraordinary letters of recommendation, Dr. Albert
C. Kirby, Associate Dean for Admissions and Student Affairs at CWRU's medical
school, granted Fischer an interview. Subsequently Dr. Kirby placed Fischer
on an alternate list but ultimately denied her application. The following year
Fischer reapplied to CWRU.3

In this second application process Fischer
was one of seven hundred applicants granted an interview and the only applicant
to be interviewed by three Admission Committee members: Dr. Kirby, Dr. Richard
B. Fratianne, and Dr. Mildred Lam. Dr. Kirby believed that CWRU should accept
Fischer into the class. Drs. Fratianne and Lam concluded that a blind student
would be unable to complete the
requirements of the medical school program.

CWRU's four-year curriculum consists
of three basic components: the core academic program, the flexible program,
and the patient-based program. The core academic program occupies the medical
student's first two years and is taught using traditional methods such as lectures,
lab experiments, and textbooks. The core academic program consists of study
in the basic sciences, such as anatomy, histology, pathology, and physiology.
The flexible program consists of electives, allowing students to engage in independent
research and study in a specific area. The patient-based program includes clerkships
in internal medicine, pediatrics, surgery, obstetrics and gynecology, psychiatry,
and primary care. In these different clerkships students provide direct patient
care. For example, students must perform a complete physical exam, review laboratory
test results, review patient charts, and perform basic medical procedures, such
as starting an I.V., administering medications through veins, drawing blood,
and responding in emergency situations. The surgery clerkship includes rotations
in the emergency room and intensive care unit.

After interviewing Fischer, Dr. Fratianne,
Associate Professor of Surgery at CWRU, concluded that Fischer would be unable
to complete the medical school program. He believed that due to her lack of
vision, Fischer would be unable to exercise independent judgment
when reading an X-ray, unable to start an I.V., and unable to effectively participate
in the surgery clerkship.

Following an interview with Fischer,
Dr. Lam, Associate Professor of Medicine at CWRU, concluded that a blind student
would be unable to complete the first and second year courses in the basic sciences
which required the student to observe and identify various tissues and organ
structures. For example, histology requires a student to identify tissue and
organ structures through a microscope, and pathology requires a student to observe
how such structures are affected by disease. She believed that no accommodation
would enable a blind student to complete these course requirements.

Dr. Lam further opined that a blind medical
student could not complete the third and fourth year clerkships. A blind student
would be unable to start an I.V., draw blood, take night call, react in emergency
situations, or pass the objective clinical exam which required a student to
perform a physical exam and read an EKG and an X-ray. Dr. Lam prepared a list
of forty-three medical conditions, such as jaundice or a patient's state of
consciousness, which require good vision to diagnose. Dr. Lam also listed twenty-one
medical procedures, such as arterial line placement, which require good vision.
Dr. Lam concluded that an intermediary could not assist a blind medical student
because use of an intermediary would require extra time that is not available
in an emergency situation, and the observations during and the accuracy of the
physical exam would be "only as good as the intermediary."
Fischer recalled that during the interview, Dr. Lam
commented that the "whole concept" of a blind medical student was
"ridiculous."

After the three interviews and after
consulting other CWRU medical school professors and students, CWRU's Admissions
Committee, by a unanimous vote, denied Fischer's application.4 Although the
committee was aware of Dr. David Hartman, a psychiatrist who graduated from
Temple University School of Medicine while totally blind in 1976, the committee
did not contact Dr. Hartman or
Temple University.

Dr. Hartman's experience affected the
decision-making in this case. Temple University, in 1972, voluntarily increased
the size of the incoming class by one to accept Dr. Hartman. To facilitate his
first two years of study in the basic sciences, Dr. Hartman used a raised-line
drawing board to diagram and illustrate various structures. Postdoctoral or
graduate students privately tutored Dr. Hartman by describing to him the slides
of structures under microscope and using the raised-line drawing board. Other
medical students also assisted Dr. Hartman by describing experiments they conducted
and otherwise sharing information. Dr. Hartman also listened to books on tapes,
used readers, and relied on his sense of touch for classes such as anatomy.

In virtually all of his first and second
year courses Dr. Hartman required one-on-one assistance from his professors.
Dr. Hartman estimated that the professors in the anatomy department, which included
courses in gross anatomy, neuroanatomy, embryology, and histology, spent double
or triple the time tutoring him than they spent tutoring the average student.
John R. Troyer, Ph.D., a professor who was on the faculty at Temple when Dr.
Hartman attended, believed that the extra time he spent with Dr. Hartman took
away from time he had to tutor other students. For this reason Dr. Troyer had
reservations about accepting another
blind student.

Professors at Temple also modified their
lectures to accommodate Dr. Hartman. For example, professors diagrammed structures
on the raised line drawing board that the other students viewed under a microscope
and verbally described processes instead of visually demonstrating them. One
professor even sat next to Dr. Hartman during class and described procedures
being conducted in a class demonstration.

To facilitate his clerkships, Dr. Hartman
would have a nurse, another student, the resident, or intern perform parts of
a physical examination which required visual observations and describe their
observations to him. Another student or a nurse would read patient charts and
laboratory test results to him. Dr. Hartman could not start an I.V. without
the supervision and assistance of a nurse and could not read an X-ray without
relying on a radiologist.

During the surgical clerkship Dr. Hartman
spent only one or two days a week for three to four hours a day in surgery,
where other students spent six or seven hours a day every day in surgery. Instead
of being placed on night call alone, Dr. Hartman was paired with another student
because the hospital relied on medical students to start I.V.s and draw blood.
Dr. Hartman's testimony revealed
that his successful completion of the school's requirements depended on the
willingness of the faculty and other students to spend the extra time describing
and sharing information with him.

Following the second denial of Fischer's
application to medical school, Fischer filed a complaint with the OCRC, alleging
that CWRU had discriminated against her by denying her admission to the medical
school on the basis of her handicap. After an investigation OCRC found it probable
that CWRU engaged in discriminatory practices in violation of R.C. 4112.022
and filed a complaint and notice
of hearing.5

Following the hearing the examiner concluded
that CWRU had not discriminated against Fischer and recommended dismissal of
her complaint. The hearing examiner found that (1) Fischer could not complete
the first two years of CWRU's requirements unless CWRU was willing to accommodate
Fischer's handicap beyond what is legally required and was willing to place
an undue burden on its teaching faculty, and (2) Fischer could not successfully
complete the core clerkships without substantial modification to the essential
nature of the program.

Upon its review of the hearing examiner's
report, OCRC came to a different conclusion. Relying heavily upon Dr. Hartman's
experience, OCRC concluded that Fischer could complete the medical school program
with reasonable accommodations that would not modify the essential nature of
its program. OCRC further found that CWRU violated an affirmative duty to gather
substantial information to ascertain whether Fischer could benefit from the
medical school's program. Finding CWRU had discriminated against Fischer, OCRC
issued a cease and desist order and ordered CWRU to admit Fischer into its next
class.

CWRU appealed to the Cuyahoga County
Common Pleas Court, which found that reliable, probative, and substantial evidence
supported OCRC's findings of fact and conclusions of law and affirmed the OCRC
order. The Court of Appeals for Cuyahoga County reversed, holding that the record
did not support the trial court's finding that admitting Fischer would not necessitate
a modification of the essential nature of the program and would not place an
undue burden on CWRU. The court of appeals determined that the trial court had
abused its discretion by relying upon Dr. Hartman's experience at Temple University
and in finding that Temple made only reasonable accommodations. This cause is
now before the court upon the allowance of a discretionary
appeal.

Cook, Justice. In this case, we are presented
with the question of whether CWRU violated R.C. 4112.022(A) by denying a totally
blind applicant admission to its medical school. We affirm the judgment of the
court of appeals finding no violation.

"It shall be an unlawful discriminatory
practice for any educational institution to discriminate against any individual
on account of any handicap:

"(A) In admission or assignment
to any academic program, course of
study, internship, or class offered by the institution."

Similarly, Ohio Adm. Code 4112-5-09(B)(1)
provides:

"Qualified handicapped persons shall
not be denied admission or be subjected to discrimination in admission or recruitment
on the basis of handicap at an educational institution covered by Chapter
4112. of the Revised Code."

The parties agree and we hold that a
prima facie case of discrimination in education under R.C. 4112.022(A) includes
three elements: (1) the plaintiff is a handicapped person within the meaning
of R.C. 4112.01(A)(13); (2) the plaintiff was otherwise qualified to participate
in the program6; and (3) the plaintiff was excluded from the program on the
basis of a handicap. [citations omitted] The parties also agree that the only
element at issue in this case is whether Cheryl Fischer is "otherwise qualified"
to participate in CWRU's medical school program.

A. OTHERWISE QUALIFIED HANDICAPPED
PERSON

The term "otherwise qualified handicapped
person" in the educational discrimination context is not defined by statute
or regulation. In the employment discrimination context, however, a "qualified
handicapped person" means "a handicapped person who can safely and
substantially perform the essential functions of the job in question, with or
without reasonable accommodation."

Ohio Adm.Code 4112(K). In the past we
have looked to federal law to support a finding of discrimination under R.C.
Chapter 4112. [citations omitted] Accordingly, in the context of discrimination
by educational institutions, we refer to Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act
of 1973, codified at Section 794, Title 29, U.S.Code, to assign meaning to the
term "otherwise qualified" handicapped
person.

Our inquiry into the meaning of "otherwise
qualified" as used in Section 504 begins with the United States Supreme
Court's analysis in Southeastern Community College v. Davis [citation omitted].
In that case, a deaf student alleged that a nursing school had discriminated
against her after the school refused to admit
her into its program. The Davis court defined an "otherwise qualified
person" as "one who is able to meet all of a program's requirements
in spite of his handicap." [citation omitted]

Applying this definition of "otherwise
qualified," the court held that the nursing school would not be forced
to accept this deaf student because her inability to understand speech without
reliance on lip reading would jeopardize patient safety during the clinical
phase of the program [citation omitted]. The court did not require the school
to modify its curriculum through a waiver of the clinical program because such
an accommodation required a "fundamental
alteration" in the nursing school's program
[citation omitted].

Six years later the Supreme Court revisited
the issue in Alexander v. Choate (1985) [citation omitted]. In clarifying its
prior decision, the Alexander court stated, "Davis...struck a balance between
the statutory rights of the handicapped to be integrated into society and the
legitimate interest of federal grantees in preserving the integrity of their
programs: while a grantee need not be required to make `fundamental' or `substantial'
modifications to accommodate the handicapped, it may be required to make `reasonable'
ones." [citation omitted] Thus
Alexander modified Davis to the extent that an "otherwise qualified"
person is one capable of participating in the program if
a "reasonable accommodation" is available for implementation by
the institution.

Most recently, the Supreme Court discussed
the "otherwise qualified" standard in School Bd. of Nassau Cty. v.
Arline (1987) [citation omitted]. The court elaborated on the definition of
an "otherwise qualified" individual:

"In the employment context an otherwise
qualified person is one who can perform `the essential functions' of the job
in question. When a handicapped person is not able to perform the essential
functions of the job, the court must also consider whether any `reasonable accommodation'
by the employer would enable the handicapped person to perform those functions.
Accommodation is not reasonable if it either imposes `undue financial and administrative
burdens' on a grantee or requires `a fundamental alteration
in the nature of [the] program.'" [citations omitted]

Similarly, Ohio Adm.Code 4112-5-09(D)(1)
requires educational institutions to make necessary modifications to their academic
requirements to prevent discrimination on the basis of handicap against a qualified
handicapped applicant. Such modifications include "changes in the length
of time permitted for the completion of degree requirements, substitution of
specific courses required for the completion of degree requirements, and adaptation
of the manner in which specific courses are conducted." However, academic
requirements that the educational institution can demonstrate are "essential
to the program of instruction being pursued by such student or to any directly
related licensing requirement will not be regarded as discriminatory...,"
and do not require modification.

Applying these principles to R.C. 4112.022(A),
we define an "otherwise qualified" handicapped person as one who is
able to safely and substantially perform an educational program's essential
requirements with reasonable accommodation. An accommodation is not reasonable
where it requires fundamental alteration in the essential nature of the program
or imposes an undue financial or
administrative burden.

Because inquiry into reasonable accommodation
is not separate from but rather is an aspect of "otherwise
qualified," we further hold that as part of its prima facie
case, OCRC carries the initial burden of showing that Fischer
could safely and substantially perform the essential requirements
of the program with reasonable accommodation. [citations
omitted] Thereafter the burden shifts to CWRU to demonstrate
that Fischer is not "otherwise qualified," i.e.,
the accommodations are not reasonable because they require fundamental
alterations to the essential nature of the program or because
they impose undue financial or administrative burdens.
Id. CWRU may also rebut a prima facie case of discrimination by
"establishing bona fide requirements or standards for admission
or assignment to academic programs, courses, internships, or classes...which
requirements or standards may include reasonable qualifications
for demonstrating necessary skill, aptitude,
physical capability, intelligence, and previous education."
R.C. 4112.022. Finally, the burden returns to OCRC and Fischer
to rebut the evidence presented by CWRU. [citation omitted]

II. STANDARD OF REVIEW

Before we determine whether Fischer is
otherwise qualified to participate in the medical school program
at CWRU, we note the standards upon which we review this case.
Pursuant to R.C. 4112.06(E), a trial court must affirm
a finding of discrimination under R.C. Chapter 4112, if the finding
is supported by reliable, probative, and substantial evidence on
the entire record. [citation omitted]

The role of the appellate court in reviewing
commission orders is more limited--to determine whether
the trial court abused its discretion in finding that there was
reliable, probative, and substantial evidence to support the commission's
order. [citation omitted] A trial court abuses its discretion
where its decision is clearly erroneous, that is, the trial
court misapplies the law to undisputed facts. [citation omitted]

We agree with the court of appeals and
find that the trial court abused its discretion in finding
that (1) the OCRC order was supported by reliable, probative,
and substantial evidence, and 2) Fischer was "otherwise qualified"
for admission with reasonable accommodations.

A. RELIABLE, PROBATIVE, & SUBSTANTIAL
EVIDENCE

OCRC relied upon Dr. Hartman's experience
at Temple University and Fischer's experience at CWRU while
she was an undergraduate to demonstrate that she could complete
the essential requirements of CWRU's medical program with reasonable
accommodations. The trial court agreed that Dr. Hartman's
testimony regarding Temple University's accommodations fulfilled
the requisite reliable, probative, and substantial evidence to
support OCRC's order. [citation omitted] We disagree.

"Reliable" evidence is dependable
or trustworthy; "probative" evidence tends to prove the issue in question
and is relevant to the issue presented; and "substantial" evidence
carries some weight or value. [citation omitted] We find that Dr. Hartman's
experience at Temple University is neither probative nor substantial evidence
to demonstrate that Fischer is currently able to safely and substantially perform
the essential requirements of CWRU's
program with reasonable accommodation.

Dr. Hartman is not an expert in medical
education. He attended Temple University twenty years ago under entirely different
circumstances than proposed today. Temple voluntarily accepted Dr. Hartman by
increasing the class size by one. The faculty at Temple acted upon a commitment
to do whatever necessary to assist Dr. Hartman, and not upon a concept of reasonable
accommodation.

Additionally, Dr. Hartman was accepted
prior to the AAMC's adoption of its technical standards for admission requiring
each medical school student to have the ability to observe. Fischer, who provided
the only testimony that she could complete the requirements of medical school
with accommodations, admitted that she had no familiarity with what a medical
student is required to do.

With Hartman and Fischer as its witnesses,
OCRC failed to present any probative or substantial testimony that Fischer would
be able to complete CWRU's course requirements with reasonable accommodation.
CWRU, however, presented testimony from several medical educators that a blind
student could not perform the requirements of medical school. Consequently,
the trial court abused its discretion in finding that OCRC's cease and desist
order was supported by probative or substantial evidence that Fischer could
complete the medical program at CWRU with reasonable
accommodation.

B. ACCOMMODATIONS WERE NOT REASONABLE

The court of appeals also found that
the trial court abused its discretion by finding that Fischer was otherwise
qualified for admission with reasonable accommodations. Whether an accommodation
is reasonable is a mixed question of law and fact. [citation
omitted]

OCRC suggests that certain accommodations
such as raised line drawing boards, tutors, and faculty assistance; occasional
use of sighted students; and laboratory assistance would permit Fischer to realize
the benefits of the first two years of the medical school program. OCRC also
suggests modifications which would help her complete the required clerkships,
such as the use of intermediaries to read X-rays and patient charts and to perform
parts of a physical examination as well as the waiver of course requirements
she could not perform such as starting an I.V. or drawing blood. OCRC argues
that these accommodations are reasonable because those skills are not necessary
for Fischer to pursue a practice in psychiatry, are not necessary for CWRU to
maintain its accreditation as a medical school, and would not require a fundamental
alteration in the nature of the program, since they are not essential to it.
For the following reasons we hold that the trial court's finding that these
accommodations were reasonable is clearly erroneous and an abuse of discretion.

First, a similar argument regarding intermediaries,
supervision, and course waiver was rejected by the United States Supreme Court
in Davis, [citation omitted] The court held that because the deaf nursing student
would not receive "even a rough equivalent of the training a nursing program
normally gives," the school was not required to make such a "fundamental
alteration" in its program. [citation omitted] In the present case all
of the medical educators who testified at the hearing agreed that it would be
impossible to modify the traditional methods of teaching in a manner that would
impart the necessary skills and information for a blind student to complete
the essential course requirements.

Second, CWRU's decision not to modify
its program by waiving course requirements or permitting intermediaries to read
X-rays or perform physical examinations is an academic decision. Courts are
particularly ill-equipped to evaluate academic requirements of educational institutions.
[citations omitted] As a result considerable judicial deference must be paid
to academic decisions made by the institution itself unless it is shown that
the standards serve no purpose other than to deny an education to the handicapped.
[citation omitted] Furthermore, an educational institution is not required to
accommodate a handicapped person by eliminating a course requirement which is
reasonably necessary to the proper use of the degree conferred at the end of
study.

[citation omitted] The goal of medical
schools is not to produce specialized degrees but rather general degrees in
medicine which signify that the holder is a physician prepared for further training
in any area of medicine. As such, graduates must have the knowledge and skills
to function in a broad variety of clinical situations and to render a wide spectrum
of patient care. All students, regardless of whether they intend to practice
in psychiatry or radiology, are required to complete a variety of course requirements,
including rotations in pediatrics, gynecology, and surgery.

Both the AAMC technical standards and
the medical educators who testified at the hearing rejected the use of an intermediary
by a medical student. In these medical educators' opinions, the use of an intermediary
would interfere with the student's exercise of independent judgment--a crucial
part of developing diagnostic skills. Accordingly, a waiver of the medical school's
requirements such as starting an I.V. or reading an X-ray or the use of an intermediary
to perform these functions would fundamentally
alter the nature of the program.

Finally, an administrative agency should
accord due deference to the findings and recommendations of its referee, especially
where there exist evidentiary conflicts. [citation omitted] In this case, the
referee concluded that Fischer could not complete courses in the basic sciences
without placing an undue burden on the faculty and could not complete the clerkships
without substantial modification
to the essential nature of the program.

OCRC adopted the hearing officer's findings
of fact but did not accept his recommendation. Rather, OCRC placed great weight
upon Dr. Hartman's testimony in arriving at a conclusion contrary to the hearing
officer's. As discussed supra, however, Dr. Hartman's testimony was not probative
of the issue and was insufficient to form the basis of a finding that the accommodations
were reasonable.

III. DUTY TO INVESTIGATE

Finally, OCRC contends that CWRU's failure
to inquire into technological advances to assist the blind, its failure to contact
Dr. Hartman or Temple University, and its failure to consult experts in educating
the blind during its decision-making process violated an affirmative duty to
investigate whether accommodations would enable Fischer to complete the medical
school program.

OCRC relies on Mantolete v. Bolger [citation
omitted] in support of an affirmative duty to investigate. In Mantolete the
court considered the definition of a qualified handicapped person in the context
of Section 501 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, codified at Section 791, Title
29, U.S.Code. Section 501 prohibits handicap discrimination by federal employers,
requiring such employers to take
affirmative action against discrimination.

That section and its regulations imply
that "a more active and extensive effort than 'nondiscrimination' must
be made to eliminate barriers to employment of the handicapped in federal agencies,
departments, instrumentalities, and contractors." [citation omitted] The
Mantolete court imposed a duty upon federal employers "to gather sufficient
information from the applicant and from qualified experts as needed to determine
what accommodations are necessary to enable the applicant to perform the job
safely. (Emphasis added.) [citation omitted] As noted in the concurring opinion
in Mantolete, however, "impos[ing] demanding information-gathering requirements
upon federal employers" is justified by the express "affirmative action"
language of Section 501--language that does not appear in Section 504. [citation
omitted] Thus, OCRC's reliance on Mantolete is misplaced.7

The United States Supreme Court recognized
that in order to protect handicapped individuals from "deprivations based
on prejudice, stereotypes, or unfounded fear," a determination as to whether
an individual is otherwise qualified should in "most cases" be made
in the context of an "individualized inquiry into the relation between
the requirements of the program and the abilities of the individual." [citations
omitted]

Similarly, Ohio law does not support
the imposition of a duty to investigate in all cases. Rather, R.C. 4112.022
contemplates that there will be situations in which a school could justifiably
exclude all persons with a particular handicap from admission to a program.
R.C. 4112.022 does not consider an act discriminatory where it is based upon
a bona fide requirement or standard for admission. OCRC argues that vision is
not a bona fide physical requirement for admission to medical school because
CWRU failed to adopt the vision requirement prior to the rejection of Fischer's
application.

Again, we must disagree. Regardless of
when CWRU adopted its own set of admissions standards and whether the AAMC standards
are mandatory, the AAMC technical standards represent a comprehensive study
supporting denial of admission to blind medical school applicants. Once CWRU
confirmed the complete absence of an ability to observe, CWRU could deny Fischer's
application based upon a bona fide standard for admission to the medical school.8

IV. CONCLUSION

We agree with the court of appeals and
find that the trial court abused its discretion in finding that the OCRC order
was supported by reliable, probative, and substantial evidence and that Fischer
was otherwise qualified to participate in the medical school program. First,
the trial court abused its discretion in finding that OCRC's cease and desist
order was supported by probative or substantial evidence because the testimony
of Dr. Hartman was neither probative nor substantial on the issue of whether
Fischer could complete CWRU's requirements with reasonable accommodation. Second,
the trial court's findings that the modifications were reasonable and that Fischer
was "otherwise qualified" to participate in CWRU's medical school
program were clearly erroneous and an abuse of discretion because the accommodations
suggested by Fischer would (1) require fundamental alterations to the academic
requirements essential to the program of instruction, and (2) impose an undue
burden upon CWRU's faculty. Finally, once CWRU confirmed her complete absence
of an ability to observe, CWRU could deny Fischer's application based upon a
bona fide standard for admission to the medical school.

This case is not about whether appellant, Cheryl A. Fischer,
a non-sighted person, should or should not be admitted to Case Western Reserve
University's medical school. This case is about whether the university must,
as all others, comply with R.C. 4112.022 and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation
Act of 1973, Section 794, Title 29, U.S.Code, or may the university rely, as
it and the majority does, on the blanket exclusion standard of the Association
of American Medical Colleges.

The law mandates a clear and affirmative duty to investigate
whether reasonable accommodations could be made by the medical school for Fischer's
needs. It is conceivable that after such investigation, accommodations required
to facilitate Fischer's education would require more than a "reasonable"
effort. If so, then admission could be lawfully denied. Conversely, an investigation
by the university might have produced information that would be helpful not
only in Fischer's case but, also, in other cases where physically challenged
individuals might seek admission.

Accordingly, because I believe that the university violated
its lawfully mandated affirmative duty to gather information as to whether it
could, or could not, reasonably accommodate the needs of Fischer, I must respectfully,
on this ground, dissent. Alice Robie Resnick, Justice, dissenting.

"Prejudice" is defined as "an opinion or leaning
adverse to anything without just grounds or before sufficient knowledge."
[citation omitted] Today, the majority opines that no reasonable accommodations
can be made which would enable a blind student to complete the medical school
program. In so doing, the majority literally divests itself of knowledge to
the contrary by completely disregarding as not probative or substantial the
testimony of an individual who, while totally blind, was admitted to and graduated
from medical school, and is a board-certified practicing psychiatrist who also
happens to teach in his field. This enables the majority to rely solely on the
testimony of the very personnel who have prejudged the "whole concept"
of a blind medical student as "ridiculous," while simultaneously holding
that those persons had no duty to investigate whether reasonable accommodations
could be made to assist a blind student completing the medical school program.
This is a case of prejudice, pure and simple. I dissent.

I. DUTY TO INVESTIGATE

R.C. 4112.022, like Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of
1973, Section 794, Title 29, U.S.Code, is designed to protect "handicapped
individuals from deprivations based on prejudice, stereotypes, or unfounded
fear, while giving appropriate weight to such legitimate concerns of grantees
as avoiding exposing others to significant health and safety risks." [citation
omitted] It is a statute aimed at means, not ends. At a fundamental level, it
provides for a method of evaluation grounded in knowledge. One would suppose,
therefore, that the duty to investigate is axiomatic. It should be obvious to
any reasonable person that, in order to give meaningful consideration to whether
reasonable accommodations would enable a blind student to effectively complete
the medical school program, the medical school must explore the nature and benefit
of available methods of accommodating the blind.

Nevertheless, the majority impugns the contention that Case
Western Reserve University ("CWRU") had an affirmative duty to investigate
whether reasonable accommodations would enable plaintiff-appellant, Cheryl A.
Fischer, to complete the medical school program, before denying her admittance
on the basis of her visual handicap.

A. Mantolete v. Bolger

The majority begins its analysis of the duty to investigate
by stating that the Ohio Civil Rights Commission ("OCRC") "relies
on Mantolete v. Bolger [citation omitted] in support of an affirmative duty
to investigate." The majority then distinguishes Mantolete because, "[a]s
noted in the concurring opinion in Mantolete,...`impos[ing] demanding information-gathering
requirements upon federal employers' is justified by the express `affirmative
action' language of Section 501 [of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, Section
791, Title 29, U.S.Code]--language
that does not appear in Section 504." The majority concludes, therefore,
that "OCRC's reliance on Mantolete is misplaced."

This portion of the majority's analysis is disconcerting, not
so much in the way it reviews Mantolete, but because it reviews Mantolete.9
Mantolete was only one of a litany of cases cited by OCRC in support of its
proposition that there is a duty to investigate. By selectively extracting Mantolete
from the pile and simply distinguishing it from the instant case, the majority
is able to make it appear as though the commission's position on this issue
is untenable. In this way the majority has managed to avoid confrontation with
those courts which hold that, under Section 504, an educational institution
must make reasonable efforts to explore alternative methods of accommodating
the handicapped. These cases reveal that the purpose and history of Section
504 dictate such requirement and that, in the absence of a duty to investigate,
the requirement to make reasonable accommodations would be rendered meaningless.
[citations omitted]

In addition, as observed by Donald Jay Olnick, [citation omitted]
"[A]s a matter of fairness, the existence of such a duty should be recognized
because the institution has greater knowledge of the components of its program
than does the handicapped applicant. The institution can look to its own experience
or, if that is not feasible, to that of other institutions in providing education
to individuals with handicaps similar to those of the applicant in question.
In addition, it will be able to seek advice concerning possible accommodations
from private and government sources. The handicapped individual may also suggest
accommodations and bring forward relevant employment experience demonstrating
that accommodations are possible." Moreover, "institutions can consult
handicapped individuals who have completed similar programs." [citation
omitted]

Investigation by CWRU would have revealed, at the very minimum,
a number of possible sources for exploring the prospect of accommodating a blind
medical student, including the experience of Dr. David W. Hartman and other
blind physicians, not all of whom lost vision after completing training. [citations
omitted] In fact, these articles readily suggest that a blind medical student
or physician can succeed. "`Aside from his surgical skill, the physician's
greatest commodity in trade is his intellectual ability to interpret and to
correlate. This is not impaired by the loss of one sensory modality.'"
[citation omitted] In fact, one article noted that "[a] broad spectrum
of adapted instruments and devices [is] available for individuals with visual
impairment, varying from the simple and mundane to the most sophisticated high
technology," and actually set forth a noncomprehensive resource table for
the visually disabled physician. [citation omitted]

CWRU either disregarded or never consulted any of these sources,
including Dr. Hartman or Temple University, in deciding not to admit Fischer.
CWRU's "refusal to investigate and consider the modifications necessary
to accommodate [Fischer] preclude it from rebutting plaintiffs' evidence that
such accommodation would neither change the essential nature of the program
nor place an undue burden upon" CWRU. [citation omitted]

Blanket and Bona Fide Requirements

After distinguishing Mantolete, the majority attempts to explain
that any duty is based on a bona fide requirement or standard for admission.
The majority finds CWRU's blanket exclusion of all blind medical school applicants
to be bona fide because it is based on the technical standards of the Association
of American Medical Colleges ("AAMC").

In general, blanket exclusions are subject to the same level
of scrutiny as are individual exclusions: [citation omitted] "Southeastern
Community College v. Davis (1979), [citation omitted] cannot mean that the [employer]
can discriminate by establishing restrictive `program requirements' where it
could not so discriminate in making individual employment decisions. The Rehabilitation
Act, taken as a whole, mandates significant accommodation for the capabilities
and conditions of the handicapped. Blanket requirements must therefore be subject
to the same rigorous scrutiny as any individual decision denying employment
to a handicapped person."

As explained somewhat differently in Pandazides v. Virginia
Bd. of Edn. [citation omitted] the "defendants cannot merely mechanically
invoke any set of requirements and pronounce the handicapped applicant or prospective
employee not otherwise qualified. The district court must look behind the qualifications.
To do otherwise reduces the term 'otherwise qualified" and any arbitrary
set of requirements to a tautology."

Thus, blanket requirements are not ipso facto bona fide. CWRU
cannot exclude all blind medical school applicants without first investigating
and considering reasonable accommodations for the blind, any more than it can
exclude an individual applicant without conducting such an investigation. Otherwise,
an educational institution could easily circumvent the statute by the simple
expedient of turning an otherwise discriminatory act into a blanket prohibition
against a particular type of handicap. [citation omitted]

The majority, however, has carved an exception in those cases
where blanket exclusions are supported, even after the fact, by guidelines adopted
by the AAMC. The only authority cited by the majority that is arguably relevant
to this issue is Buck v. United States Dept. of Transp. [citation omitted]

In Buck, three deaf truck drivers sought a waiver from the Federal
Highway Administration ("FHWA") regarding its regulation requiring
that drivers of interstate commercial vehicles be able to hear. The regulations
at issue were promulgated pursuant to the Motor Carrier Safety Act, which requires
the Secretary of Transportation to promulgate regulations ensuring that "the
physical condition of operators of commercial motor vehicles is adequate to
enable them to operate the vehicles safely." [citation omitted] The FHWA
denied the requests and the court denied the petitions for review.

In denying petitioners relief, the court explained as follows:
"The petitioners...misstate the issue when they argue that the agency must
decide whether a deaf individual is able to operate a truck safely in spite
of his handicap. They are really launching a collateral attack upon the validity
of the hearing requirement itself, arguing in effect that the FHWA erred in
determining that the ability to hear with the specified acuity is necessary
in order to operate a vehicle safely. . . . [T]he proper forum in which to get
the relief the petitioners seek is the FHWA, in a proceeding to modify or repeal
the rule itself. The agency is in fact in the process of conducting such a rulemaking,
[citations omitted]

Unwittingly, the majority has elevated the status of the AAMC
guidelines to the level of a federal regulation. This is particularly inappropriate
for several reasons. First, the AAMC is not a legislative body. [citation omitted]
There is no evidence that any legislative body, state or federal, has directly
or indirectly considered, let alone adopted, the subject AAMC guidelines, much
less interpreted them to preclude admission to all blind applicants to medical
school.

Additionally, Donald G. Kassebaum, M.D., who is secretary to
the Liaison Committee on Medical Education ("LCME"), testified that
the AAMC plays no role specifically in the accreditation of United States medical
schools, that the decision about accreditation is made wholly by the LCME, that
the LCME has devised no accreditation standards which would prohibit the admission
of blind applicants to medical school, that the failure of a medical school
to adopt the AAMC guidelines would not affect accreditation, and that the "Report
on Technical Standards" was not even published as AAMC policy, but as guidelines
for use by schools in developing their own individual technical standards. There
is no reason, therefore, to give the AAMC guidelines accrediting, let alone
legislative, force. In fact, in McGregor v. Louisiana State Univ. Bd. of Supervisors
[citation omitted] the court explained that "whether the [American Bar
Association] accredits part-time programs is not determinative of reasonableness
under the Rehabilitation Act, and we refrain from giving ABA accreditation such
adjudicatory effect." Accordingly, CWRU's after-the-fact reliance on the
AAMC guidelines does not transform its blanket preclusion of blind medical students
into a bona fide requirement or standard for admission, obviating its duty to
investigate.

II. STANDARD OF REVIEW

This portion of the majority's opinion is, quite frankly, astonishing.
The majority sets forth some well-established standards of review. One of these
standards is that an appellate court cannot reverse a trial court's judgment
unless it finds that "the trial court abused its discretion in finding
that there was reliable, probative, and substantial evidence to support the
commission's order. [citation omitted]

Dr. Hartman is a psychiatrist. Dr. Hartman has been totally
blind since the age of eight. He graduated from Gettysburg College in 1972,
summa cum laude and as a Phi Beta Kappa. He attended medical school at Temple
University from 1972 to 1976. He graduated from medical school and became a
board-certified practicing psychiatrist. He was assistant professor of psychiatry
at the University of Pennsylvania from 1980 to 1982 and presently serves as
volunteer faculty at the University of Virginia. Dr. Hartman's curriculum vitae
reads like a five-page laundry list of accomplishments, appointments, awards,
and publications.

Dr. Hartman's testimony consisted of ninety-four transcribed
pages of examination primarily concerning the issue of accommodations made for
him at Temple's medical school. Dr. Hartman completed all required courses and
clerkships at Temple. No courses or clerkships were waived because of his blindness.
He completed studies in anatomy, histology, microscopic anatomy, biochemistry,
neuroanatomy, physiology, pathology, and pharmacology. He successfully completed
his clerkships, including rotations in internal medicine, general surgery, psychiatry,
obstetrics and gynecology, pediatrics, plastic surgery, neurology, and emergency
room medicine.

Dr. Hartman was able to complete these courses and clerkships
by use of various accommodating aids, including raised line drawings; models;
guidance and assistance from other students, laboratory technicians, and professors;
reliance on his other senses such as hearing and touch; and tape recorders.
He also suggested that there may be some additional technological aids that
would be of assistance, such as computerized voice reading or computer printing
in Braille.

With Dr. Hartman's testimony staring it in the face, how can
the majority conclude that the trial court abused its discretion in upholding
the OCRC's order that a blind medical student could perform the requirements
of medical school with reasonable accommodation? No problem--simply ignore it.
As incredible as it sounds, the majority finds that "Dr. Hartman's experience
at Temple University is neither probative nor substantial evidence to demonstrate
that Fischer is currently able to safely and substantially perform the essential
requirements of CWRU's program with reasonable accommodation." In support,
the majority explains that:

"Dr. Hartman is not an expert in medical education. He
attended Temple University twenty years ago, under entirely different circumstances
than proposed today. Temple voluntarily accepted Dr. Hartman by increasing the
class size by one. The faculty at Temple acted upon a commitment to do whatever
necessary to assist Dr. Hartman and not upon a concept of reasonable accommodation.
Additionally, Dr. Hartman was accepted prior to the AAMC's adoption of its technical
standards for admission requiring each medical school student to have the ability
to observe."

This explanation serves only to enforce the majority's commitment
to rid itself of Dr. Hartman's testimony. No portion of this explanation has
anything to do with whether Dr. Hartman's testimony constitutes probative or
substantial evidence in this case. Whether or not Dr. Hartman is a so-called
"expert in medical education," there is no rule that a witness must
qualify as an expert in medical education in order to testify in a handicap
discrimination case such as this one. In fact, Dr. Hartman's testimony was not
offered for any opinions he might hold relative to medical education. Instead,
the relevance and value of Dr. Hartman's testimony lie in the nature of his
experiences and the character of the accommodations made for him at Temple.
Moreover, such a rule would be absurd. It would exclude virtually all testimony,
both lay and expert, relevant to the issue of available accommodations vis-a-vis
the capabilities and limitations of particular handicaps. Additionally, the
majority does not reveal what qualifies someone as such an expert or the justification
for imposing any particular set of qualifications. For example, what justification
could possibly support disregarding Dr. Hartman's testimony, while considering
the testimony of Albert C. Kirby and John R. Troyer, both of whom the majority
accepts as "medical educators," but neither of whom had ever attended
medical school?

Likewise, the circumstances under which Dr. Hartman was accepted
at Temple have no bearing on the relevance or value of his testimony in this
case. The level of Temple's commitment to Dr. Hartman does not necessarily reflect
the character of its actions. Simply stated, just because Temple was prepared
to do more for Dr. Hartman than what was required does not mean that what Temple
actually did for Dr. Hartman was unreasonable. What is relevant and valuable
to the issue of reasonable accommodation in this case is the nature and extent
of the actual accommodations made for Dr. Hartman at Temple, not the state of
mind of Temple's faculty.

On the contrary, Dr. Hartman's experience at Temple is both
probative and substantial evidence to demonstrate that Fischer is currently
able to safely and substantially perform the essential requirements of CWRU's
program with reasonable accommodation. Dr. Hartman's experience at Temple presents
a unique opportunity by which to gauge the nature and character of accommodations
needed to enable a blind person to successfully and beneficially complete medical
school. The proof, so to speak, is in the pudding. While his experience may
not be conclusive of reasonableness, it is certainly relevant and carries some
weight.

In fact, both the OCRC and the trial court found this evidence
to be rather significant. In its order below, OCRC found that Dr. Hartman's
experience and qualifications give him "unparalleled [sic] expertise as
to whether a blind student can reap the benefits of a medical program."
Additionally, Dr. Hartman has received seven major appointments in the area
of psychiatry. He served as consultant to or member of five critical programs,
including consultants to the National Institute for Advanced Studies on the
admission of blind and otherwise handicapped persons into the allied health
fields in compliance with Section 504. He has published in at least six publications
and participated in fifteen relevant presentations on the subject of education
and the blind. The rejection of Dr. Hartman's testimony as not probative or
substantial is pure nonsense.

After discounting Dr. Hartman's testimony (and, incidentally,
Fischer's as well), the majority is able to blatantly conclude that "[w]ith
Hartman and Fischer as its witnesses, OCRC failed to present any probative or
substantial testimony that Fischer would be able to complete CWRU's course requirements
with reasonable accommodation." Simplistic reasoning is merely a mode for
result-oriented decisions.

Still unsatisfied, the majority goes on to invoke the rule that
an administrative agency (OCRC) should accord due deference to the findings
and recommendations of its referee (hearing officer). The problem, however,
is that this rule comes into play when an agency rejects its referee's report
without reviewing the record. Even then, the rule loses its significance once
the trial court reviews the record and upholds the agency's decision. [citations
omitted] In its statement of the facts, the majority explains that "[u]pon
its review of the hearing examiner's report, OCRC came to a different conclusion."
This is inaccurate. In its cease and desist order, OCRC specifically explained
that it rejected the hearing examiner's report "[a]fter careful consideration
of the entire record." Absent contrary evidence, there is no basis for
the majority to conclude otherwise.

Moreover, a careful reading of those two opinions below reveals
that a myriad of facts are set forth in the OCRC order that are not contained
in the hearing examiner's report. In any event the trial court reviewed the
entire record and affirmed the OCRC. Thus there is no legitimate basis for discounting
Dr. Hartman's testimony or for according deference to the hearing examiner's
report.

III. CONCLUSION

If a particular professional door is to be closed to an entire
class of people, it should not be done in such a cavalier manner. The decision
as to whether a medical school may deny admittance to the blind is of great
social importance. It cannot be made without a complete and careful consideration
of all available information concerning possible modifications and accommodations,
as well as the capabilities and limitations of the blind.

It is our duty and responsibility under R.C. 4112.022 to ensure
that educational decisions denying admittance to the handicapped are not discriminatory.
It is, therefore, a dereliction of this duty for the majority to allow CWRU
to make such a determination without first investigating and considering reasonable
accommodations, and for the majority itself to refuse to consider the experience
of a successful blind medical student. No educational institution, and no court,
may justify a preordained conclusion by exorcising all knowledge to the contrary
without running afoul of R.C. 4112.022's mandate.

The only issue properly before the court is whether the common
pleas court abused its discretion in finding that OCRC's order was supported
by reliable, probative, and substantial evidence. Dr. Hartman's testimony constitutes
reliable, probative, and substantial evidence that Fischer could effectively
and beneficially complete the essential requirements of CWRU's medical program.10
It is incredible that the majority has ignored this testimony and accorded substantial
judicial deference to CWRU's decisions, while refusing to impose upon CWRU the
duty to investigate in the first instance.

Justice requires that the court of appeals' decision be reversed
and that the decision of the trial court be reinstated. I therefore vehemently
dissent.

DOUGLAS and PFEIFER, JJ., concur in the foregoing dissenting
opinion.

1. That same year, Fischer also applied to the medical schools
at Ohio State University, University of Cincinnati, University of Toledo, and
Temple University. Ohio State University also placed Fischer on an alternate
list. However, all of the schools denied her admission.

2. CWRU did not formally adopt its own technical admissions
standards until June 1990. These standards also require that an applicant have
sufficient use of the sense of vision and the ability to observe both at a distance
and close at hand.

3. Fischer also reapplied to Ohio State University and, that
same year, applied to the medical schools at Wright State University, George
Washington University, and Georgetown University, among others. All of these
schools denied Fischer admission.

4. CWRU had previously offered admission to students with handicaps
such as paraplegia, visual and hearing impairments, and dyslexia.

5. Fischer also filed charges against the medical schools at
the Ohio State University and Wright State University, alleging discrimination
on the basis of her handicap. Following an investigation, however, OCRC did
not find probable cause against these institutions and did not file complaints.

6. The term "otherwise qualified" appears in Section
504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 [citation omitted] Section 504, as amended,
provides that "[n]o otherwise qualified individual with disability shall,
. . . solely by reason of his or her disability, be excluded from the participation
in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any program
or activity receiving Federal financial assistance." [citation omitted]

7. The dissent criticizes our discussion of Mantolete v. Bolger
[citation omitted] as being "selectively extracted" from the cases
cited by the OCRC. However, the other cases were cited only in a footnote to
OCRC's Reply Brief, and it was Fischer who characterized Mantolete as the "seminal
case" on the issue of an affirmative duty to investigate. Furthermore,
our discussion of Sections 501 and 504 is in response to the appellants' view
that such cases are persuasive authority for the proposition of an affirmative
duty to investigate. This case, however, was brought only under R.C. Chapter
4112.

8. The Office for Civil Rights, United States Department of
Education, determined that CWRU's 1991 denial of Fischer's application to the
medical school on the basis of the AAMC Technical Standards was consistent with
Section 504 and dismissed Fischer's complaint against CWRU.

9. It should be noted, however, that even the concurring opinion
in Mantolete expressly left the issue open as to whether Section 504 imposed
a similar information-gathering requirement upon private employers. [citation
omitted] Thus, any implication in the majority's use of language that the concurring
opinion in Mantolete suggested a particular result under Section 504 is unfounded.

10. Ohio Adm.Code 4112-5-09(D)(1) provides that: "Educational
institutions shall make such modifications to [their] academic requirements
as are necessary to ensure that such requirements do not discriminate or have
the effect of discriminating, on the basis of handicap, against a qualified
handicapped applicant or student. Academic requirements that the educational
institution can demonstrate are essential to the program of instruction being
pursued by such student or to any directly related licensing requirement will
not be regarded as discriminatory within the meaning of this rule. Modifications
may include changes in the length of time permitted for the completion of degree
requirements, substitution of specific courses required for the completion of
degree requirements, and adaptation of the manner in which specific courses
are conducted." (emphasis added)

The majority finds that there are certain "essential"
requirements that would have to be waived or performed through the use of intermediaries,
such as reading X-rays, performing physical examinations or starting an I.V.
The majority rejects the use of supervisory personnel and waiver, pursuant to
Southeastern Community College v. Davis (1979), [citation omitted] on the basis
that Fischer would not receive even a rough equivalent of the training a medical
education normally gives. Moreover, the majority gives considerable judicial
deference to CWRU's decisions and feels that these requirements are essential
because they are reasonably necessary to the proper use of the degree ultimately
conferred.

If we put Dr. Hartman's testimony back into the equation, it
is difficult to find as a matter of law that Fischer would be unable to receive
the benefits that a medical education normally gives. Any determinative effect
that Davis, supra, may otherwise have had in this case dissipates upon consideration
of Dr. Hartman's testimony. In fact, it was Dr. Hartman's testimony that he
could perform a physical examination alone, and that he would stand with other
students and have an X-ray read to him. The only two areas that give him trouble
are starting an I.V. and drawing blood. OCRC specifically found that "it
has not been demonstrated that physically performing these tasks constitutes
an essential component of [CWRU's] program." Whether a requirement is essential
is a question of fact. [citation omitted] Moreover, in order to be considered
essential, there must be some nexus between the requirement and the prospective
profession. [citation omitted] Additionally, CWRU is not deserving of judicial
deference in this case because it refused even to investigate the issue. I do
not believe, based on the record, that providing some visual assistance to Fischer
in these limited tasks would, as a matter of law, sacrifice the integrity of
CWRU's entire medical program. [citation omitted]

***************************

Did you know that you can make a gift to the National Federation
of the Blind and save taxes three ways? Well, you can! With a gift of appreciated
stocks, bonds, or mutual funds. For more information contact the National Federation
of the Blind, 1800 Johnson Street, Baltimore, Maryland 21230, a District of
Columbia nonprofit corporation.

**************************

[PHOTO/CAPTION: Carol Castellano]

NEW BOOK SENDS
WRONG MESSAGE TO PARENTS

by Carol Castellano

From the Editor: Early last year I began hearing and reading
about a new book intended to provide a wonderful new resource to parents of
young blind children. The reviews I read, all of which were written by professionals
in the blindness field, were flattering and enthusiastic. Those invited to contribute
chapters to the text were knowledgeable and well respected, and several parents
had been asked to add their perspective.

As I say, the reviews were positive, but the quotations included
gave me qualms. When I received a review copy of the book, I passed it along
to Carol Castellano, an experienced and successful parent of a blind daughter
and a leader in the National Organization of Parents of Blind Children, a division
of the National Federation of the Blind. I was interested to see how a parent
of a healthy, happy blind child would react to all the so-called honest talk
about what it is really like to deal with a son's or daughter's blindness.

Carol called me when she finished reading the book and asked
how much space she had to write her review. I responded that this was clearly
an important book, and good or bad, Federationists were going to be running
into questions about it and dealing with its impact for years to come. I told
her to report honestly on what she had found and dispense praise and criticism
where she thought they were due. The following article is the result. Doubtless
many parents of young blind children will read Children with Visual Impairments,
so we had all better be prepared to help them put it into perspective. Here
is Carol Castellano's attempt to do just that:

Children with Visual Impairments: A Parent's Guide,
a new book edited by M. Cay Holbrook and published by Woodbine House, is intended
to give parents of visually impaired babies and very young children information
and guidance on issues related to visual impairment. Written by sixteen professionals
in the blindness field and three parents, the book contains much information,
promising chapter titles (each chapter is written by a different author or authors),
and a number of suggestions for working with a visually impaired child. The
question must be asked, however, on the whole, will this book help or harm blind
children and their families?

In my role as President of Parents of Blind Children of New
Jersey, I speak frequently to parents of newly diagnosed blind children. My
experience with these parents is that they are seeking information, suggestions,
and a listening ear; but above all, they are seeking hope. Often the only hope
they have early on is that their child will have a little eyesight. What they
know about blindness--or what they think they know--is pretty bleak. They usually
know nothing at all about blindness skills. I gently tell them about my daughter--that
she attends our neighborhood school and that she has the same books as all her
classmates, but in Braille. I mention that she's a sports nut and played on
our town's T-ball team. I tell them that she has a cane and uses it to go all
over. I might mention that her grade is working on research skills at the library
or that this morning she went to a rehearsal of her class play.

The parents' attention is definitely engaged. "Your daughter
is blind?" they ask me. "Totally blind," I reply. Hearing that
a totally blind child somehow manages to accomplish all these normal tasks gives
the parents heart. It also opens the door to a discussion of blindness skills,
the key, of course, to a blind person's managing such tasks. Suddenly the parents
on the other end of the phone see a vision of a normal life and get a glimpse
of how this life might be achieved.

Many times the conversation goes on to how parents might enhance
a blind baby's development; sometimes we brainstorm to resolve a specific problem
the family is experiencing. Usually I advise those parents to eat their Wheaties
because they'll need their strength. I tell them I'll send them some literature
to read. I invite them to one of our Parents of Blind Children gatherings to
meet other families and some blind adults. I let them know that they're doing
the smart thing by reaching out and gathering information and that their child
is lucky to have them. The closing words from the parents are almost always:
"Thanks. You've made me feel so much better."

Parents feel better because they begin to see the possibility
of a bright future for their child; they begin to believe they'll be able to
manage what needs to be done; they realize others have gone successfully down
the road that is before them. Feeling better enables parents to start down that
parenting road with a belief that will support them during both the easy times
and the challenging times: that blindness need not stop their child from leading
a fulfilling, normal life.

Contrast this with the approach found in Children with Visual
Impairments. First of all, in the book blindness is labeled a "misfortune"
and parents are told that they "may feel as if they must have done something
to be singled out for this bad fortune." Janice Herring, author of this
chapter, "Adjusting to Your Child's Visual Impairment," comforts parents
with the statement, "You know you would never have deliberately done anything
that you could have foreseen would result in your child being born with a visual
impairment." So much for the possibility that it might be okay to be blind.

The authors made a decision to use the term "visual impairment"
instead of the word "blindness." Much is made in the early part of
the book about the fact that most visually impaired children have "some
useable vision" and that very few children are actually blind--meaning
totally blind in their nomenclature. (In the book's glossary under the entry
"blindness," it reads "See total blindness.") I suppose
parents are meant to be comforted by the idea that their child is probably not
blind. The authors tell us, "Even children who are considered blind often
have some visual perception of light and dark that will assist them as they
learn about the world," and "rarely do we assume that a child has
absolutely no vision unless his eyes have been removed. . . . If the child has
some level of visual ability, it may be used for important tasks such as orientation
and mobility and daily living skills." No mention is made of the fact that
children with no vision at all manage orientation and mobility and daily living
skills by using the skills of blindness. What are the messages here? That first
of all, chances are your child is not blind; second, your child needs vision
to accomplish the tasks of life (Lord help those poor totally blind kids!).
Parents are told to rearrange the environment and to encourage the child to
use that vision. Since the skills of blindness are not mentioned, there is no
hope if the child has no eyesight to use for tasks.

The emphasis on eyesight over blindness skills has tragic implications,
as shown in the following story, from the chapter "Adjusting to Your Child's
Visual Impairment." The parent-author, Janice Herring, tells of taking
her children to the zoo and feeling depressed about all that her severely visually
impaired son would miss. Her sadness changes to pleasure and pride, however,
when he enjoys looking at the animals he could see and shows "his commitment
to peering into every cage--even those where I know he saw nothing." What
are the implications for the future for a child who so early learns that to
elicit pride and pleasure in one's parents, one needs to pretend to see?

The fundamental idea that it is awful to be blind underlies
most of this book and is the assumption from which most of the ideas and suggestions
flow. Few would deny that parents need to adjust to the idea that their child
is blind, but does the dreadful picture drawn by this book of the visually impaired
child and his or her effect upon family life help with this adjustment? Consider
the following premises, all taken from the book:

"There are a multitude of reasons you may feel intimidated
or inadequate at the prospect of raising a child who can't see. It would be
impossible to list them all...."

Parents "may spend every waking moment thinking or talking
about their child's visual impairment...just trying to fathom all the ways that
their child's life will be different than expected... Then they begin agonizing
over a new concern: how will this disability affect my family? Will her special
needs consume all our time and energy until we have no time for our own interests?
Will she be more of a burden than a friend to our other children? Is there any
hope that we can still have a `normal' family life?" (Incidentally, the
author does not answer "yes" to that last question.)

"Like many parents, you might eventually want to seek
counseling for the chronic grief that can go with having a child with a disability."

The story "Welcome to Holland" is printed, which
relates how your trip to Italy was diverted and you land instead in Holland,
where "you must stay." After the story, the chapter authors write,
"But you, the parent, aren't the only one living in Holland. Your child
will spend his entire life there, while other children take off for Italy and
other flashier destinations."

Another author states, "In fact, it is not unusual to
wish that your child would just go away."

Resentment is called "a perfectly natural reaction to
having a child with a visual impairment."

The overall portrait of the visually impaired child is a rather
frightening one. In it we see a child who will have trouble eating, sleeping,
toileting, communicating, moving, and even cuddling. His "learning will
be limited" and he will "almost invariably" lag behind sighted
children. This child will read at a slower rate and might need to spend more
years in school. She will have fear of the unknown, fear of open spaces, and
will "be terrorized by a blood pressure cuff." This child will be
unable "to observe and imitate" and unable to "see similarities
and differences among objects in the environment." This child will grow
up into an adult who might be able to work or live on his own. The words of
one parent/author capture the feeling the reader is bound to be left with: "We
still don't know all the things Casey won't be able to do." I can't help
thinking that new parents being bombarded with messages like these might find
it a bit difficult to develop a positive attitude toward blindness. They might
even begin to feel a bit depressed. (In fact, I strongly suspect that a few
of the authors of this book are depressed!)

Many times in the book, the choice of words, along with the
underlying attitude, conveys the negativity. "You will disable your child
more in the eyes of others if you treat her as if she is more helpless than
she is," and "many children with visual impairments begin receiving
educational support in infancy to help them learn to cope with our visually
oriented world." These ideas can so easily be expressed in a positive manner,
one that is respectful of blind children and of the skills of blindness that
they will be learning.

Much ado is made in this book of the impact a visually impaired
child will have on every aspect of family life. The litany of potential horrors
could wear down even the most doggedly optimistic of parents. Here are a few
of the lowlights: Your friends might leave you; your marriage might fail; you
might go bankrupt ("meeting the everyday and special needs of children
with visual impairments is expensive...the loss of income for missed days of
work and health insurance co-payments and deductibles...the list of potential
expenses goes on and on"); in fact, having this visually impaired child
might be so expensive that "your other children may have to wear hand-me-downs
or forgo music lessons or Little League"; you might be so frazzled at day's
end that "you have no energy left for socializing or even for asking your
kids how their day went"; you'll have "many sleepless and tear-filled
nights"; everyday tasks such as breastfeeding and diapering your visually
impaired baby become events for which you must find means not to "frighten,
harm, or humiliate" your child; if you need a break, maybe you'll be able
to find a sitter "willing to try" and you will realize somewhere down
the line that, even though you might think your child looks like a normal child,
others do not.

If your shoulders are not already sagging under this burden,
take a look at how the authors say your other children will be affected: they
might experience responses to their sibling's disability "ranging from
anger and resentment to anxiety and grief," feelings which, the authors
assure us, are "perfectly normal and nothing to be ashamed of." I
can't help wondering, might there be any other range of emotions with which
siblings might greet a new member of the family? Might there be love? joy? neutrality?
acceptance? pleasure? Not according to this book. (My son's speech to NFB of
New Jersey's state convention when he was seven years old comes to mind. "As
a brother of a blind child, I think it's fun to have a sister who is blind!
We play lots of games together. It's really pretty regular to have a blind sister.
Come on--she's only a kid!" And "Because my sister is blind, I have
gotten to know lots of friendly people--her Braille and cane teachers and all
the people in the NFB.")

Ruth and Craig Bolinger, authors of the chapter entitled "Family
Life," go on to list the "typical emotions" of siblings-- anger,
resentment, anxiety, grief, guilt, frustration, upset, scared, poke fun, make
fun, embarrass, lash out, target, and disgust. There is no suggestion whatsoever
that sibling relationships might be loving and normal. (Ironically, these same
authors counsel that children are not born with responses and opinions and that
"when the time comes to teach siblings about your child's visual impairment,
you can give them the attitudes, opinions, and responses you want them to have."
I'll say!) Even if you think your other children are coping well, the book warns,
be on the lookout for unexplained illness, poor schoolwork, nightmares, and
loss of interest in play. But fear not, your normal children can attend a sibling
support group, where they can discuss "why they feel the way they do":
and talk about "subjects that make all kids uncomfortable."

No wonder the authors feel you might want to get rid of this
child! Do these potential pitfalls exist? I suppose they do. But since the possibility
that a family might actually live through the experience of having a visually
impaired child successfully is never suggested, parents reading this book might
well conclude that these negative experiences are likely.

The assumption that blindness is awful surfaces in various sections
of the book. In the self-esteem chapter, for example, the authors (Dean W. Tuttle
and Naomi R. Tuttle) tell us that "problems and crises stemming from impaired
vision" will cause the child to struggle through trauma, shock, denial,
unreality, mourning, withdrawal, succumbing, and depression, before arriving
at self-acceptance and self-esteem (the reader needs a high tolerance for psycho-jargon).
A warning is also issued against comparing your child's achievements to those
of sighted peers and against setting "unrealistic" goals. These authors
did, however, write the warmest lines in the book. In regard to praising a child,
they write, "A child is never too young to understand that he is a source
of joy to Mom and Dad."

In the chapter called "Your Child's Development,"
Kay Alicyn Ferrell offers clear, useful explanations of the various developmental
areas but has as her central thesis that, although not much is known about the
development of visually impaired children, what is known is that their development
is very different from that of sighted children and much more difficult. "When
a sense such as vision fails to develop properly," the author writes, "a
child's entire course of development can be altered." Parents can take
cold comfort from her statement that "comparisons to normal development
are not really relevant for children with visual impairments. In other words,
what is considered a delay for other children may not be a delay for your child--it
may, in fact, be normal."

The explanation for this "normal delay" is, of course,
that the child is lacking vision. "It would be nice if the other senses
could substitute for vision--if they could provide the same type of information
that helps babies to learn and form concepts about their world and if they could
do so as frequently as does vision. Unfortunately, they do not." Parents
are told that without eyesight their child will have "no memory of what
objects feel like," that life will appear as a "jumble of isolated
experiences," that parts of their child's concept development will be like
"putting a puzzle together without seeing the photograph on the box,"
and that their child "has no way of knowing what that meow, growl, or purr
is." (More than a little sighted bias is evident in some of these statements.)

Parents are informed that vision is involved in 90 percent of
early learning, "but the way your child learns about the world is going
to be different. To a greater or lesser degree, your child will have to rely
instead on her senses of smell, touch, hearing, and taste for information. As
mentioned above, this will make it harder for your child to learn because she
cannot watch and imitate...and may make her less motivated to learn." In
addition, we learn that "moving independently from place to place seems
to be one of the most difficult skills for children with visual impairment"
(would that be with or without a cane? I wonder), that "children with visual
impairments typically have trouble with certain aspects of communication,"
that they are likely to be reluctant to explore their environment, and that
even attaching to their parents seems to be harder for visually impaired babies
because they "send different signals," and "they often do not
seem to cuddle like other babies."

No one would deny that eyesight contributes a great deal to
the development of sighted babies, but what is the point of bludgeoning parents
of visually impaired children with the idea that their child, because of the
lack of this particular sense, will have difficulty in virtually every area
of development? What is the point of this reverence for eyesight when writing
for parents of visually impaired children? Where does this leave the parent?
Will it help parents develop a genuine respect for the alternative ways their
child will use to learn about the world? What is to be made of the author's
seeming determination to convince parents of the differences and difficulties
their children will encounter in every area? Wouldn't it have been much more
useful--not to mention uplifting--simply to explain to parents in a positive
manner how visually impaired babies do learn about the world (as we indeed know
that they do) and attempt to engender a respect on the part of the parent for
the alternative methods the baby will be using to learn about the world?

After reading this chapter, parents may well conclude that their
baby will never grow up satisfactorily. Ferrell assures us that all this "does
not mean that learning is impossible," but a parent hearing her message
may just conclude that it is. Glaringly missing from this discussion of development
is any mention of alternative skills. Instead, I am afraid parents will be left
with the sinking feeling that all is lost because their child lacks the one
necessary sense. Yet this author is the same enlightened Professor Kay Ferrell
who courageously argued in the pages of the September/October, 1996, issue of
The Journal of Visual Impairment and Blindness that the time has come to
end vision-stimulation programs because they aren't helping children with low
vision.

The chapter's suggestions for ways in which parents can foster
their child's development are generally useful ones, but even they contain that
negative impulse: "Use touch. Your touch means a lot to your child. Sometimes
a touch on the shoulder can be just the reassurance your child needs to plod
ahead!" and "Try closing your eyes before you try to hold and drink
from a cup...to get an idea of what you are asking your child to do...It might
not be as easy as it seems!" A few words about blindness skills and the
fact that blind people do such tasks every day would have been welcome.

Many good suggestions are offered in the chapter called "Daily
Life" and the author, Beth Langley, does refer to adaptive skills, although
the reader must wade through a lot of negative language to get to them. For
example, the author writes, "Toilet-training is another area of difficulty
for children with visual impairments," but then she goes on to suggest
the normal training activities. In her conclusion she states that "when
a child has a visual impairment, helping him achieve independence may not only
be more challenging but emotionally draining for both you and your child."
She goes on to say that: "You will likely have to make small adjustments
in attitude and in your child's environment. With planning, consistency, and
creativity, however, you cannot only foster independence but also self-esteem,
acceptance, and competence in all aspects of your child's life." I think
this author is on the fence. She seems to believe that blind children can make
it ("The key is to encourage independence and competence in everything
you do or say"), but she seems to be just learning how to write about blindness
using positive words.

The chapter called "Children with Multiple and Visual Disabilities"
by Jane Erin gives an overview of conditions that often occur with visual impairment.
Although parents may find the medical section of this chapter scary (toxoplasmosis
is a parasite "which can invade the brain and eyes"), in general the
chapter offers positive suggestions for helping a multiply disabled child learn
to move, act on the world, interact with others, and learn language.

The basic premise of the "Orientation and Mobility"
chapter by the late Everett W. Hill and Mary-Maureen Snook-Hill is that "orientation
and mobility training promotes safe, efficient, graceful, and independent movement
through any environment, indoor and outdoor, familiar and unfamiliar."
The authors also advocate early training in O&M and offer a discussion of
"foundation skills" that is quite useful despite a bit of jargon.

The discussion of formal mobility skills' leading to eventual
independent travel, however, is the standard fare, beginning with "self-protective
techniques" and giving much weight to the sighted guide.

The authors take a position of apparent neutrality regarding
the various "mobility systems"--sighted guide, the long cane, alternative
mobility devices, dog guides, and electronic travel aids--and this is problematic.
I suppose their intent is to offer objective information, but the fact is that
the different systems are not equal because they do not lead to the same level
of independent movement. The authors do not discuss the systems in terms of
this ultimate test (independent movement), but I think it is the one that would
matter most to parents. But parents new to blindness may not yet be able to
make this analysis, especially when presented with what appears to be such objective,
neutral information.

For example, the authors explain each system and then list advantages
and disadvantages to each. Under sighted guide they list as an advantage that
"it provides maximum safety to the child during movement." What message
does this give the parent? That the child will not be safe if moving alone!
The authors also mention that "sighted guide provides companionship as
well as information about the surrounding environment." The mention of
companionship feeds fears and stereotypes about the poor blind person who must
rely on the kindness of strangers for companionship. The second half of the
quotation, concerning environmental information, may lead parents to conclude
that the only way a blind person can have any idea of where he is is if a sighted
person is there to tell him.

Some bias, or at least preference, is revealed in the Alternative
Mobility Device section. These devices are described as easier to use conceptually
and motorically and requiring less instruction than canes, but do they provide
the same result? The authors do not mention that these devices require the use
of two hands, thus making it impossible for the child to carry something or
to hold hands with the parent (see below). In addition they are heavier than
canes and simply do not allow as much freedom of movement. They are discussed,
however, as if they are an equivalent alternative to a cane. The authors' bias
toward these devices is revealed in another section of the chapter, where they
casually mention that "a child in a kindergarten classroom may need formal
O&M instruction to learn basic sighted guide skills, self-protection skills
such as trailing, or the use of an alternative mobility device to travel with
his classmates from his classroom to the cafeteria and the playground."
Again, what message will the parent hear? That in order to move with his classmates,
the child must use one of these devices and not a cane.

The authors define a mobility system as "a guide or device
that permits independent movement through the environment." I suspect,
however, that they are not using the word "independent" as most parents
would understand it or as the dictionary defines it. Many in the O&M profession
seem to have convinced themselves that using the sighted guide mobility system
gives a blind traveler the same independence as using a cane. The authors list
as a disadvantage of the sighted guide system that "independence is limited"
but they mean "because a guide might not always be available."

The chapter exhibits the usual love affair with sighted guide
that I have seen so often in professional literature. Three pages are devoted
to a discussion of the various techniques of sighted guide, along with three
photographs which illustrate them. (In one photograph the child is holding a
cane, but it is close to his body and high off the ground. No canes are shown
in the other photos.) In contrast, only two pages are given over to the cane,
and the only photo shows a straight and a folding cane lying on a carpet and
not in use! (A cane appears in one other photo in the chapter, one that is illustrating
"upper hand and forearm protective technique.")

In addition, the authors hold dearly to the idea of how actively
the blind person participates when using the sighted guide technique. Their
insistence on this, coupled with my own observations of how children behave,
leads me to suspect that they protest too much! I also suspect they haven't
ever lived with a blind child. Too many of us parents have had the experience
of our children being taught this system and then being only too content to
"leave the driving" to someone else! The authors also claim that a
preschooler "needs to learn sighted guide skills so that he can travel
comfortably in unfamiliar and outdoor settings with you." A statement like
this serves only to mystify the idea of a blind child's movement, rather than
to simplify it. Those of us who take a common sense approach to raising our
blind children know that you don't need a "system" composed of complicated,
rigid techniques that must be taught by a highly trained professional simply
to take a child out for a walk!

The emphasis on technique strikes me as overdone. The discussion
of cane technique, for example, is quite rigid and supports (perhaps unintentionally)
the position of some cane instructors that very young children should not be
given canes because they cannot yet perform the techniques correctly. The emphasis
given to technique, in fact, becomes almost reverential in two parts of this
chapter. First parents are advised not to hold hands with their child. ("Whenever
possible, you should encourage your child to use the proper grip.") I feel
sorry for parents who might be inclined to follow this advice, for they might
never experience the pure, normal pleasure of holding hands with their small
child! Incidentally, the proper grip entails "grasping the guide's wrist,
positioning the thumb to the outside and the four fingers to the inside of the
guide's wrist. The grip should be secure, but comfortable for the guide. The
child holds his upper arm parallel and close to the side of his body, forming
approximately a 90-degree angle with his lower arm so that he is positioned
approximately one-half step behind the guide." I cannot help thinking that
this, along with the detailed instructions about "narrow passageway technique"
and "stairway technique," are much ado about very little!

Later, in a section called "Modifying Your Home,"
the authors explain that some consistency in the home environment will allow
the child to become familiar with the spatial arrangement and to develop confidence
in his mobility. It is then suggested--incredibly, I think--that after the child
learns where all the furniture is, parents should move it around! "Move
the toy chest to a different corner of the room so your child has to use his
self-protective techniques to travel the new route." The question must
be asked, who or what is being served here, the child and his independent mobility
or the system and its techniques? Does any person need this kind of outer-imposed
stress in his or her own home?

Other problems exist in the "Modifying Your Home"
section. Since the authors' premise is that "how your home is arranged
can greatly affect the development of O&M skills," parents may get
the idea that they will constantly be rearranging the furniture in order for
their child to move about the house. First it is suggested that "you could
initially arrange the furniture along the wall so that he could travel along
the furniture without having to move out into open space" (heaven forbid!),
and then parents are told, "As your child becomes more motivated and proficient,
you could rearrange the furniture and provide landmarks. For example, when your
child contacts the coffee table, instead of continuing in the same direction
along the wall, he would turn left, trail the edge of the coffee table to the
end, continue across two feet of open space to the big chair, walk around the
chair to the wall, and turn the corner into the kitchen." This makes getting
across a room seem impossible! If this were not bad enough, parents are then
told, "As your child becomes still more proficient, you can challenge him
to continue to use his O&M skills by creating a more complex environment.

That is, increase or decrease the amount of furniture or rearrange
it." Again, if any of these professionals ever actually lived with a blind
child, they would quickly see that these ideas are not only impractical, but
present unnecessary obstacles to the goals of confidence and independent mobility.

I have saved the best for last. In contrast to the 226 pages
that precede it, the "Growing into Literacy" chapter is downright
cheerful! In a noticeably different and refreshing tone, the author of this
chapter, Alan J. Koenig, writes about visually impaired children as if they
were on a par with sighted children! He makes laying the foundation for literacy
seem not only possible, but simple and fun. The author points out how the early
experiences a visually impaired child needs are the same ones that sighted children
need, with simple adaptations made for blindness. Parents will be empowered
by this information; it will help them to feel competent, knowledgeable, in
control of the situation, and on the right track.

Bias toward eyesight is evident in many chapters of this book,
but not in this one. With much common sense the author writes, "If your
child has vision, visual information should be paired with other types of sensory
information. . . . Visual information should not be the only source of information.
Again, the more senses that can be used to learn things, the better."

The author is clearly a Braille enthusiast who pleasantly addresses
the usual criticisms of Braille, includes a reference to the "handy slate
and stylus," points out that audio tapes and technology do not replace
literacy, and several times suggests making contact with a blind adult!

In conclusion, too much of this book expresses a negative attitude
toward blindness; parents will be left with little hope. Too many qualifications
are placed on the child's chances for success (the phrase "as independent
as possible" is used repeatedly); there are far too few references to the
skills of blindness. The absolute distinction made between visual impairment
and blindness will keep many children from learning blindness skills that would
enable them to function more efficiently, thus vastly reducing the "frustrations"
and "problems stemming from visual impairment" that the authors so
frequently refer to. Many references are made to turning to others for help--friends,
relatives, doctors, counselors, and especially "vision professionals."
Surprisingly little emphasis is given to finding other parents of visually impaired
children. One author mentions consumer groups, and one author actually suggests
seeking out a blind person.

Each chapter ends with parent comments. I do not understand
why the book's editor chose to include them, since they are, for the most part,
very negative and quite sad. I suppose their inclusion flows from the book's
basic premise, that blindness is absolutely awful. I know from the professional
literature that there is a (large) school of thought that parents who do not
dwell on how handicapped their children are and who instead decide to pick themselves
up and just move forward, are in denial. I am also reminded of a certain style
of parent support group, in which success seems to be measured by how many people
are crying by meeting's end.

Mention is made a few times in the book of the idea that "your
child is a person first and only secondarily a person who happens to have a
visual impairment" and "visual impairment is only one of your child's
characteristics" and "we must be diligent in our insistence that there
is no shame attributed to the word `blind.'" Still, these end up being
only lip service. The book speaks for itself in its studious avoidance of the
B-word and its clear message that every aspect of your child's life and your
family's life will be negatively affected by visual impairment. Parents new
to blindness are not likely to have any defense against this sort of negative
view, and more experienced parents will not need the basic information this
book provides.

WHY I AM CHOOSING
BLINDNESS: PERSONAL REFLECTIONS
ON THE NEED FOR A FUNCTIONAL DEFINITION

by Scott Feldman

From the Editor: One of the most annoying misconceptions about
the philosophy of the National Federation of the Blind is the notion that committed
Federationists are proud of their blindness and, if given a chance, would choose
it over returned vision. Those who have heard and believed such statements are
enraged, I think, because they consider it needlessly cruel to encourage the
development of neurotic and twisted ideas in people who are already facing vision
loss. Federationists, on the other hand, are frustrated when we are accused
of holding such notions because, in fact, we don't.

Learning to be unapologetic and to resist feelings of inferiority
because of blindness is very different from being proud of the characteristic.
It is as absurd to be proud of blindness as it is to take pride in being six
feet four, having size five feet, or demonstrating an IQ of 145. One may be
comfortable or not with any of these characteristics, but one can certainly
claim no credit for possessing them.

A person might well take pride in developing his or her artistic
ability, athletic skill, intellectual powers, or expertise in the alternative
skills of blindness, but that is very different from claiming personal credit
for a God-given characteristic. Of course, being only human (and therefore often
a little ridiculous), people frequently take pride in their naturally wavy hair,
quick reflexes, or green eyes. It isn't surprising, then, that, in the process
of evolving a healthy identity as a competent blind person, some of us act for
a while as though taking pride in blindness were the goal rather than achieving
self-confidence and effectiveness as a blind person.

Debunking the second half of the misconception is more complex.
I don't think I know a single blind person who would actually choose blindness
above fully functioning sight, if the exchange were an actual option. In a world
structured for and largely dependent on sight, it is obviously more efficient
to use sight to get things done. But such a choice is virtually never an option.
Most people with a little residual vision are faced with the dilemma of either
depending on very restricted visual data for doing tasks or mastering alternative
techniques for getting the job done. The pragmatic question these people face
in situation after situation is which strategy would be more efficient. The
emotional freight that such decisions carry can be heavy indeed. If one has
never learned effective alternative techniques and if one has always depended
on vision, then vision--even very poor or painful vision--often seems the easier
choice. Family and friends reinforce this tendency every time they urge the
person not to "act blind" because, after all, he or she can still
see something.

Recognizing these pressures, experienced members of the Federation
understand the importance of encouraging those with vision problems to get to
know able blind people who are comfortable using the alternative skills of blindness.
It isn't that we prefer blindness; we just prefer efficiency, confidence, comfort,
and success. For almost everyone with less than 10 percent of normal vision,
this means using some combination of blindness skills and remaining, genuinely
usable vision. Working out the combination is time-consuming and often emotionally
demanding.

One man who has given this struggle a lot of thought in the
past few months is Scott Feldman, a graduate student in clinical psychology
and a member of the Chicago Chapter. This is what he has to say about his journey
into self-understanding: "But that's not you--you're only print-impaired."
It was my best friend Amy speaking, and she was clearly concerned about me.

Until recently I suppose that I thought of myself in this way
as well. My visual problems first manifested themselves after extended periods
of reading, and reading print was the first activity that I eventually had to
relinquish, in my early twenties. Even today, several years later, I could force
myself to read a small amount of print in an emergency. but I would pay the
price with accommodative spasms. When I try to see things at near distance,
my eyes lock, as in a muscle cramp, and later double vision and a throbbing
headache set in as my eyes struggle to relax. I do not like pain, nor do I like
setting myself up for failure. Since 1990 I have listened to my books instead,
and I write with a speech-adapted computer.

Last year I began to learn Braille because in many situations
speech is an inadequate substitute for print, such as when I have to give a
lecture or presentation from notes. Braille is coming slowly, and materials
in any accessible format are hard to come by. Only five percent of printed material
published each year is converted to speech or Braille. So I most certainly do
feel print-impaired.

This might have been the end of the story, except for one, well
two little problems. To begin with, there are many other things besides print
that can get too close for my comfort: people's faces, a kitchen counter or
dining room table, or a Rembrandt, to name a few. I suppose that you could say
that I am face-impaired, food-impaired, and art-impaired as well. Better, let's
say that I am functionally blind at near distance and leave it at that. This
is where I was several months ago, after much kicking and screaming--not to
mention a year-long depression that nearly sapped my will to live.

Life is not fair, nor is it simple. At present I get around
without the assistance of a cane or dog. Walking outside is one of the activities
recommended to me by my visual therapists because it allows me to gaze into
the distance and relax my focusing system. (A world-renowned neuro-ophthalmologist
who first diagnosed my condition as severe accommodative and convergence insufficiency
suggested that I become a forest ranger. When I said that I wanted to be a scholar,
he asked me if I would mind if he prayed for me. I did not.)

If you are sighted, you may be aware of relaxing your eyes,
particularly when you are walking along, lost in thought. Your eyes do not fixate
on anything in particular but take in the general environment. You perceive
gross forms, color, and most definitely movement. You do not crash into things.
This is how I have gotten around for the past six years. It works, except for
the fact that I cannot make out street signs or other such niceties of modern
travel. To be precise, if I squint through the various overlapping images, I
can sometimes make out street signs, but then I get back into that same painful
cycle that I described earlier.

So traveling is the second little problem. I was not aware of
it while in Los Angeles for graduate school, where my range of independent travel
was effectively limited by my busy campus schedule and inability to drive. Nor
was it a problem when I returned to Chicago on a leave of absence since I know
the city very well, having spent the latter part of my childhood and my adolescence
there.

But this past October I traveled with my family to London and
Paris. It was a lovely trip, especially because of the English theater. During
a side trip to Stratford on Avon, I scalped a ticket to the Royal Shakespeare
Company's performance of Macbeth. I sat next to a delightful old woman who had
been coming to Stratford for decades. She recalled the glorious days when the
likes of Richard Burton were members of the company. The lights went out, and
we fell silent, expectant. At the end of the performance, she asked me whether
I had enjoyed it, not being able to make out the individual actors. As it turned
out, I had enjoyed the performance more than she because I had been able to
focus on the poetry, while she had difficulty getting beyond her aggravation
at the inauthenticity of the costumes and stage set. (At one point, to her horror,
the gate keeper lit a cigarette.)

It was walking around on my own in London that made me realize
how compromised my ability to navigate new places visually has become. The first
day I went out I squinted at the street signs painted on the sides of buildings
to make out where I was. I did not enjoy the theater that evening or the following
afternoon because my eyes reminded me, in no uncertain terms, that I had mistreated
them. A couple of days later I wanted to venture north to visit the Folk Institute
because I am very fond of Irish music. My parents said that it would be no trouble
to go with me, but I felt that it was important to figure out how to travel
there independently. The influence of the National Federation of the Blind was
in full evidence here. With the help of an excellent map--and my parents' eyes--I
familiarized myself with the general layout of central London and with the specific
route I planned to take. Then I set off for the Kensington underground station,
our local base of operations. To make a long story short, after a few wrong
turns and requests for directions from a couple of polite Londoners (they are
so polite), I found the place. Happily, I returned to the subway with four new
CD's in hand, the result of a thoughtful introduction to the institute's collection
by another extremely polite Londoner.

My travels the following few days were much the same. Instead
of asking my eyes what street I was on, I asked someone more reliable. As you
might suspect, this strategy failed miserably after we took the newly constructed
tunnel under the English Channel to Paris. Being a native English-speaker and
a sometimes Spanish-speaker, I couldn't even begin to formulate the appropriate
question, let alone understand the response. To the extent that I walked around
on my own, such as when my parents indulged in a visit to a museum, I traced
large circles around prominent landmarks.

As I sit here in my new apartment in Minneapolis, staring out
into an impossibly early snowfall, the little question of how to navigate an
unfamiliar city blossoms into a preoccupation. Besides the question of how to
map out the city, pinpointing the places that hold special interest for me (such
as a folk music club or dim-sum restaurant), I wonder how I will shop for necessities.
Twice now my refrigerator has gone empty before I asked a neighbor with whom
I am acquainted for assistance shopping. Of course, I could walk into the grocery
store and ask for customer service, but I am not blind, right?

Actually, Amy, I suspect that you and I are wrong. It is true
that I do not meet legal criteria for blindness, which are based on simple indices
of acuity and field of vision. I am not a low-vision candidate--I have plenty
of it. It just doesn't seem to be working for me.

True, many people have strong negative stereotypes about blind
people, into which they will try to lock me if I identify myself as blind in
public by using a long white cane, for example. They will see me only as a blind
person. But I have seen much more in many of the people I have met through the
National Federation of the Blind. When I am in their company, rather than feeling
ashamed of who I have become, I feel empowered to work to create a more positive
image of blindness. I am starting here.

SPECIAL NOTICES FOR NEW COPYRIGHT
LAW

by James Gashel

From the Editor: James Gashel is the NFB's Director of Governmental
Affairs. As Braille Monitor readers are well aware, the National Federation
of the Blind played a pivotal role in securing passage of amendments to the
Copyright Act during the second session of the 104th Congress. The changes which
are now in the law resulted from negotiations between Federation leaders and
responsible officials of the Association of American Publishers.

The amendments to the Copyright Act were included in a bill
to fund operations of the Congress for fiscal year 1997. The bill is known as
the Legislative Branch Appropriations Act. Although the primary purpose of the
bill is to approve spending for operating the House of Representatives and the
Senate through September 30, 1997, funds are also included for the Library of
Congress and other activities that fall within the legislative branch. As the
Constitution specifies, all bills to appropriate money must originate in the
House of Representatives and then be considered by the Senate. In the instance
of the Legislative Branch Appropriations Bill, the House did not include the
copyright amendments in its original version, but the Senate added the provisions
as section 316. The House then agreed to this change. Unlike the spending provisions
of the bill, which generally expire at the end of September, 1997, the copyright
amendments are permanent.

In the months since enactment of the new law many questions
have come to the Federation about what to do to comply. In the first place,
there is a common misconception that anyone is now permitted to reproduce any
printed material for blind people. Technically and actually, this is not quite
so. Only authorized entities are now allowed to convert printed matter into
Braille and other formats without permission.

Authorized entities include both public and private nonprofit
agencies or organizations such as schools, libraries, training programs, book
transcribing groups, and the like. With a definition like this, any individual
who wants to have material reproduced in Braille or another special format ought
to be able to find a qualified group to do the work or to sponsor having it
done.

Another question has to do with the effective date of the new
provisions. The law which includes the copyright amendments was signed by President
Clinton on September 16, 1996. The changes to the Copyright Act were immediately
effective from that date forward. Some people have assumed that material which
was published prior to September 16, 1996, cannot be reproduced without permission.
This is not the case. The exemption for reproduction and distribution of material
in specialized formats applies to any copyrighted work, no matter when the work
was published and copyrighted in the United States. The exemption would not
apply, of course, if the reproduction or distribution of the work in a specialized
format occurred prior to September 16, 1996; but this is a different matter
altogether. For all practical purposes, any nondramatic literary work that exists
(no matter when published) may now be reproduced.

So the question then comes: what about a copyright notice in
view of the fact that permission to reproduce printed matter is no longer required?
The answer is found in the law itself. The requirements--there are only two--are
quite clear-cut: (1) All works which are reproduced or distributed in a specialized
format, including Braille, audio, or digital reproductions, must contain a statement
that "Further reproduction or distribution in a format other than a specialized
format is prohibited." According to the Library of Congress, this notice
must appear both in print (for example, on the label of a recorded disc or cassette)
and in the audio, Braille, or digital text itself.

(2) Every reproduction must provide identifying copyright information
by saying: "Copyright, (holder's name), (date)." It is just that simple.
The permission language which used to appear is no longer appropriate because
permission is not required, to which one might observe that most laws result
in complicating our lives even when they do so in the name of providing us with
opportunities. Here, however, is an example of a law which has had exactly the
opposite effect. The required statements are clear, short, and to the point.
That's the way it is, and there is really nothing else to say.

[PHOTO:Sharon Gold is seated at her desk with shelves visible
behind her. A Braille Lite lies on the right side of the desk. [Photographer
Leilani Hu, reprinted by permission. Copyright The Sacramento Bee.] CAPTION:
Sharon Gold]

DOING BUSINESS AS USUAL

From the Editor: Sharon Gold is a long-time leader in the
National Federation of the Blind. She has used her expertise about Social Security
to assist numbers of blind people across the country. But most people do not
know that, in addition to her dedicated work in the Federation, Sharon has always
been a canny businesswoman. On August 12, 1996, a fine story about her appeared
in The Sacramento Bee. Here it is:

Her investment and marketing firm, housed in a two-story office
building she owns on Freeport Boulevard, is decorated with brightly colored
artwork, dark blue carpeting, and wooden bookshelves loaded with binders and
reference books. But there's a difference. Gold can't see the artwork, the color
of her decor, or the lush foliage outside her window. She is blind.

Gold, fifty-five, is practical and matter-of-fact about her
disability. "Being blind doesn't keep me from getting up in the morning
and getting my work done," said Gold, seated near a window in her large,
airy office. "Blindness can be reduced to a mere nuisance."

In September [1995] Gold incorporated SLG Enterprises, a variety
of ventures including marketing of indoor air filters and investing in distressed
real estate to fix it up for resale or lease.

Equipped with the additional tools of a voice synthesizer on
her computer and a driver to take her places, Gold manages assets of about $3
million. She says her gross receipts for the past year were about $500,000.

Her business isn't unusual and neither is her method--sometimes
she hires an agent to help with sale negotiations and sometimes she handles
them herself. But as a disabled woman over fifty, Gold's success is in her blindness
to obstacles and in her skill doing what all successful business owners do:
hire a good crew and roll with changes in the market.

Her professional life is a study in adaptability. She's worked
as a 4-H instructor to small children, an elementary school teacher, a dog breeder,
a ranch manager, and a consultant to home business owners.

"I've always had something going on," said Gold, a
petite woman with a thick thatch of silver hair. "Like successful sighted
people, I surround myself with a good crew, and I've always had an inkling for
business."

Gold has always juggled several jobs. While working as an elementary
school teacher, she also worked for the Federation of the Blind of California.
She retired from teaching in 1982 to devote herself to the Federation full time.
She worked as president of the Federation for seventeen years and also bought
residential property on the side. She left the Federation to go into business
full time.

Today she buys real estate that needs a lot of work, hires a
crew to fix it up, and then sells the property at a profit. She is also president
of the Sacramento Chapter of the Federation of the Blind.

The secret to survival, she says, is having a diverse portfolio
and profit-making as a goal.

"I don't buy things that aren't a good deal for me,"
she says. "But when I get through with a place, there will be jobs that
came out of it, a house and neighborhood improved a little, and someone who
gets a better place to live."

But in addition to possessing business sense, disabled business
people like Gold have to challenge people's assumptions, says Brenda Premo,
director of the State Department of Rehabilitation. "As a culture we tend
to believe a thing should be done a particular way," said Premo. "For
a person who is blind or in a chair or deaf, the biggest challenge is communicating
that they can do the job they say they can do."

Premo, who is legally blind, worked with Gold when Gold was
President of the National Federation of the Blind of California. Buckling under
the pressure of a disability, Premo says, has not been a problem for Gold. "As
a woman who is blind and over fifty she's got three strikes against her,"
said Premo. "And I think they have equal bearing. Her skill as a good manager
has helped her eclipse her disability."

Tom Walcott, a real estate agent with Bishop Hawk, who represents
Gold when she needs an agent, says she is just plain good at doing business.

"She's tough. She gets extremely competitive bids for construction,"
he said. "By the time she gets all the numbers she needs, she's as informed
if not more informed than any sighted investor."

Walcott represented Gold when she was negotiating to buy the
Freeport Executive Building about three years ago. Gold was a tenant in the
run-down building at the time in a suite leased by the Federation of the Blind
of California.

When the building lost all but two tenants and the Canadian
Imperial Bank repossessed it from the former owner, Walcott said, Gold wanted
to buy it. Together with Walcott, she negotiated a sale for $550,000. She says
she's doubled its value since then by restaining the building's redwood shingles,
putting in new landscaping, and aggressively finding tenants for all but one
of its eleven suites, including the Freeport Conference Center. "I'm really
fond of this building's architecture," said Gold, fingering her pager,
which has just beeped. "Just giving it a new paint job really made a difference."

ALMOST HEAVEN IN '97--NEW
ORLEANS--
A MECCA FOR FINE FOOD

by Jerry Whittle

From the Editor: The Louisiana affiliate is already working
hard to ensure that the 1997 convention will be unforgettable. Their efforts
are, of course, ably reinforced by the incomparable city of New Orleans itself.
Here is Jerry Whittle's most recent endeavor to tempt you to join us June 29
to July 6 in the Big Easy:

New Orleans is considered one of the greatest cities in the
world for haute cuisine, and the members of the National Federation of the Blind
of Louisiana want to make sure that all those who attend the 1997 National Convention
have the opportunity to take advantage of the hundreds of dining choices available
in the Crescent City. We have borrowed some recommendations from a book entitled
New Orleans: the Definitive Guide to Architectural and Cultural Treasures by
Roulhac Toledano. His suggestions for many of the more famous restaurants in
New Orleans appear below. We hope that everyone attending the National Convention
will have the opportunity to venture out and enjoy one of these wonderful places.

Acme Oyster and Seafood House, 724 Iberville Street, (504) 522-5973.
This establishment is accessible to both the French Quarter and the central
business district. Stop shopping and relax with the best fried food and sandwiches
you can find. Low to moderate prices.

Antoine's, 713 St. Louis Street, (504) 581-4422. Antoine Alciatore
opened a small boarding house on St. Louis Street soon after his arrival in
New Orleans from Marseille in 1840. Five generations of his children have run
Antoine's, each generation returning to France to learn more about cuisine and
the restaurant business. Restaurants worldwide know Antoine's, and so do all
the provincials who recognize New Orleans as their mecca for special occasions.
They come by private jet and by train. Some even take the Greyhound Bus, but
there's always a meal at Antoine's.

You can decide with the help of a waiter, but you can start
with Oysters Ellis, after Dubonnet (red) with a twist of lemon. Despite the
temptation of seafood, have a "nice tournedo." Souffl,d potatoes are
a must, and Antoine's is the only place where sauces are essential to the dining
experience. Turtle soup and sweetbreads Financiere are the Proteus Day luncheon
favorites on the Monday before Mardi Gras. High prices.

Bacco, 310 Chartres Street, (504) 522-2426. Located in the De
La Poste Hotel, this restaurant has captured the imagination of French Quarter
diners and was listed in the top twenty restaurants for 1993. High prices.

Bayona, 430 Dauphine Street, (504) 525-4455. This is the project
of award-winning chef Susan Spicer. A tiny place, pleasant, very European, Bayona
has lovely presentations of good food. Her garlic soup is a non pareil.

Bistro, 733 Toulouse Street, (504) 528-9206 is located at the
Maison de Ville and is an alternative lunch and dinner place, quite intimate
with beautifully presented French-style food.

Brennan's, 417 Royal Street, (504) 525-9711. The need for expansion
of their popular restaurant business brought the Brennan family to this address
in 1955. The family business has become history in New Orleans because of their
efforts to create a distinctive cuisine and operation. Here is the New Orleans
Irish success story, out of politics and architecture. High prices.

Brigsten's, 723 Dante Street, (504) 861-7610. Brigsten's is
located in an old house near the levee. It was rated as one of the ten best
restaurants in 1993. It also has a great uptown location among wonderful shops
all in picturesque old cottages.

Cafe du Monde, 813 Decatur Street. Although the location had
to change, as did the management during various French Market renovations, the
Cafe du Monde has been packed with locals and tourists for generations twenty-four
hours a day. Order cafe au lait and beignets since it's all you can get, except
for orange juice, hot chocolate, and regular coffee for the unadventurous. Low
prices.

Camellia Grill, 626 South Carrollton Avenue, (504) 866-9573.
Where else can you eat at a counter and have big cotton napkins? Your hamburgers,
omelettes, waffles, coffee, and mocha freezes are served by professional waiters
in pressed white jackets.

Casamento's, 4330 Magazine Street, (504) 895-9761. Here the
specialty is oysters. Some member of the Casamento family will serve you while
you enjoy the shiny white walls, tile floor, and oyster stew. Even the sidewalk
out front is covered in tile, and you'll see gunnysacks full of newly delivered
oysters or oyster shells set out to haul away.

Christian's, 3835 Iberville Street, (504) 482-4924. This restaurant
is beautifully situated in a former church but named after the owner, Chris
Ansel of the Galatoire clan. He opted for his own restaurant after learning
the business in France and at the family restaurant. They serve lunch Thursday
and Friday and dinner Monday through Saturday.

Clancy's, 6100 Annunciation Street at Webster Street, (504)
895-1111. Clancy's is located in one of those old-time frame cottages that has
changed through the years from the old corner hangout to an upscale dining experience,
reasonably priced.

Commander's Palace, 1403 Washington Ave., (504) 895-1111. Every
neighborhood has its institutions and all the things that give it wholeness.
In the Garden District it's all rolled up on Washington Avenue around Prytania
Street with Lafayette Cemetery and Commander's Palace. Opened in 1880 by Emile
Commander, the restaurant was bought by the Brennan family in 1974. It works
because of their flair for ingenuity and good food. Commander's is an occasion
itself, but take time to walk around the neighborhood a bit. Look at the bollards,
great cast iron standards sticking out of the brick pavement. They kept the
carriages from going down into the deep granite drainage ditches, also worth
a careful perusal. Look through the screens of shrubs to catch glimpses of architectural
details in fairystyle settings, cast iron lyre pattern railings, Corinthian
column caps, and entablatures, eyecatching because of their very misproportion.
Imposing facades hide chaste gable sides, and the service wings are always longer
than the houses. You'll see new combinations of classical decorative design.
But it works, both individually and as a collective whole of Classical and Italianate
motifs, jumbled and combined to create special houses in a special neighborhood,
unique to the South. Here is a neighborhood that seemed to have been built almost
entirely during the Civil War and the harsh days of Reconstruction. High prices.

Croissant d'Or, 617 Ursulines Street. This is the place for
breakfast in the old Brocato's building. Look down and see the sign in the tile
for the Ladies' entrance. Low prices.

Degas, 3127 Esplanade Avenue, (504) 945-5635. Degas is named
because in 1872 Edgar Degas stayed at the Musson House across the street at
2306 Esplanade Avenue. Moderate prices.

Dooky Chase, 2301 Orleans Street. Dooky Chase is the most famous
African-American restaurant in New Orleans, where Leah Chase and her husband
Dooky have been preparing great lunches and dinners for decades. Moderate prices.

Emeril's, 800 Tchoupitoulas Street, (504) 528-9393. This restaurant
is owned by the chef, Emeril Lagasse, who has won national awards.

Feelings, also known as Cafe d'Aunoy, 2600 Chartres Street.
This restaurant has a residential setting with good food. Moderate prices.

Gabrielle, 3201 Esplanade Avenue, (504) 948-6233. This restaurant
is where forty guests at a seating enjoy food cooked by the owner, who trained
under Paul Prudhomme. Moderate prices.

Galatoire's, 209 Bourbon Street, doesn't take reservations.
Line up with the locals at 11:30 every morning or try for the second seating.
Lots of New Orleanians go straight to Galatoire's right after work. You should
order Trout Almandine or get more adventurous with Crabmeat Ravigotte (you can't
get that anywhere else). Ask for a demitasse of dark roast coffee if you're
not brave enough for a cup of the bitter chicory. The waiters are an essential
part of the Galatoire's experience, as are the mirror-covered walls reflecting
the white tablecloths, waiters dressed in black and white, and the linen-clad
Orleanians, the women with their pearls. High prices.

Gautreau's, 1728 Soniat Street, (504) 899-7397. Uptown eating
means restaurants in little commercial buildings in residential areas, such
as Gautreau's, a drugstore building with tin ceilings and an unglazed tile floor.
This restaurant began as a project of Ann Avegno Russell, who began it despite
the distraction of six children; it barrelled to international fame in a short
time.

Gumbo Shop, 630 St. Peter Street, (504) 525-1486. The owners
may change every lifetime or so, but the gumbo and the place remain just as
much fun as they were in the 1950's, and the restaurant is located in a Spanish
colonial building dating from 1795. Low to moderate prices.

La Madeleine, 547 St. Ann Street, (504) 568-9950, is in the
Lower Pontalba apartments and is recent and owned by people from France: bread,
coffee, and atmosphere with light meals, like the Caesar salad and the Croque
Monsieur. Low prices.

Liuzza's Restaurant and Bar, 3635 Bienville Street and 234 North
Telemachus Street, (504) 482-9120. It's worth the ride to experience lunches
and dinners with beer in great cold stemmed glasses along with your po-boy.

Mandina's, 3800 Canal Street, (504) 482-9179, provides a similar
experience. Only in New Orleans will you find Italian restaurants with "Wop-Salad"
written on the menu.

Mother's, 401 Poydras Street, (504) 523-9656. This restaurant
is a mainstay for everyone from business people to longshore workers, who stand
in line to pick a po-boy or a hot lunch New Orleans style. Low prices.

Napoleon House, 500 Chartres Street, (504) 524-9752. This is
not only a great setting (they haven't spent a cent on decor since 1814) but
has great muffelettas and offers small portions of all the great Creole and
cajun specialties. It's been going strong since the 1930's, at least as a bar
with food. Low to moderate prices.

Parasol's, 2533 Constance Street, (504) 897-5413. this is a
bar and family restaurant in the heart of the Irish Channel, and it's an old-time
substitute for the "club" for the Irish constituents.

Peristyle, 1041 Dumaine Street, (504) 593-9536. This is an important
place to eat, and the setting, with murals of City Park, is very New Orleans.

Praline Connection, 542 Frenchmen Street, (504) 943-3934. The
Praline Connection is open for three meals a day with late hours. This corner
neighborhood restaurant concentrates on soul food and sweets from the adjacent
sweetshop.

Tujague's, 823 Decatur Street, (504) 525-8676. Tujague's has
been in business since 1856, presenting its brisket of beef in a six-course,
prix fixe French-style presentation after shrimp remoulade. It's casual, but
you don't order; they bring it, and it's just what you wanted even though you
may not have known it.

Over the years the staff and students of the Louisiana Center
for the Blind have ventured to New Orleans on numerous occasions. We have dined
at many different restaurants and would like to suggest some additional dining
spots that we have enjoyed for various reasons. For example, one of the most
colorful restaurants in New Orleans is a pink, stuccoed house known as Petunia's.
Located at 817 St. Louis, just off Bourbon in the Quarter, Petunia's serves
wonderful crees, quiches, and an assortment of typical creole and cajun cuisine.
We would highly recommend it for brunch or dinner. For reservations call 522-6440.

Maspero's on 601 Decatur Street is another popular, inexpensive
restaurant with an informal atmosphere. Maspero's offers local beers on tap
and muffelettas, gumbo, and other short order foods. We find that we get our
money's worth there, but we have often waited in line for the privilege, since
they take no reservations.

Richards, located at 3944 Chef Highway, is a hole-in-the-wall
place that has never closed in twenty-five years. From breakfast to midnight
snacks, Richards is open twenty-four hours a day. The waitresses are gnarled
veterans, but they sling some mean hash. Hot links, grits, and eggs for breakfast
and a po-boy at three in the morning. It is outside of town, so a bus or cab
will be needed. No alcohol is served there--just simple food with a most unusual
array of locals and feisty waitresses.

Finally, we would heartily recommend the House of Blues, located
at 225 Decatur. Featuring live entertainment from rhythm and blues giants like
the Neville Brothers and Clarence "Gatemouth" Brown, the House of
Blues offers some wonderful cuisine, such as ribs and collard greens and cornbread
and jambalaya, in a boisterous and bluesy atmosphere. For reservations call
529-2583.

All the food in New Orleans is delicious. Even the fast food
restaurants in the Quarter, such as McDonald's and Popeye's, seem to rise to
the challenge and prepare their standard fare in keeping with the great chefs
of the Big Easy. Everyone will have to come to New Orleans to experience the
wonderful variety and the ethnic restaurants of the great seaport city first-hand.
The Louisiana affiliate will offer restaurant guides in Braille and print at
the information desk during the National Convention. We will also be on hand
to make suggestions and help you decide just which way to go for the best food
in town. Get those hotel reservations in to the National Center for the Blind
as quickly as possible. The rates are one in a room, $40 per night; two in a
room, $42; three in a room, $44; four in a room, $46.

Written reservations should be addressed to Mr. Cobb's attention.
In order to confirm a reservation, you will need to send either a check or money
order for $40 as a deposit or give Mr. Cobb a credit card number. The credit
card account will be charged immediately. If a reservation is canceled prior
to June 1, 1997, half of the deposit will be returned. After that date deposits
will not be returned. Exceptions may be made in certain demonstrated emergencies.

Bon appetit and laissez le bon temps roulet.

[PHOTO/CAPTION: Curtis Chong]

AMERICAN EXPRESS SPOTLIGHTS
CURTIS CHONG

From the Editor: The following article appeared in the October/November,
1996, edition of Connections, an internal publication of American Express.
Here it is:

Technology Helping Technologies

by Dinah Rose

Curtis Chong is an organized individual, evidenced by the fact
that, among other indicators, he answers E-mail messages promptly. This, by
itself, is a trait to be much admired in today's busy work environment but takes
on particular meaning since Chong, a designer/consultant for the American Express
Financial Advisors in Minneapolis, is blind. In order to answer those E-mails,
he must first read them with the assistance of a special speech-output device.

It's a case of technology helping technologies--finding the
right combination of hardware, software, and oftentimes just plain creativity,
to help meet the needs of American Express employees who are blind, deaf, or
have other physical conditions that make it difficult to perform their jobs.

For Chong technology begins with the most simple of equipment--
a Perkins Braille writer and a slate and stylus. With these he can sit in a
meeting and record notes for later reference. On his desk is a PC connected
to a Braille embosser and speech output. The computerized voice is difficult
for the uninitiated to understand, but it enables Chong to handle most electronic
transactions without assistance. He also has a talking terminal he uses to access
the mainframe. He has another system set up at his home for disaster recovery,
which also features speech output and through which he can plug into the mainframe
off site.

In addition to the sophisticated technology, a key piece of
equipment is what Chong refers to as a "biological plug interface"--a
human reader supplied by the company, who reads paper documents and other sources
not readily accessed. With these tools Chong, who has been an American Express
employee since 1980, manages nine people and in his spare time serves as president
of the computer sciences group for the National Federation of the Blind, specializing
in adaptive technology for the blind.

Like all good managers, he takes individual abilities into consideration
when assigning tasks; and, if it involves writing, understanding concepts, initial
architectural work, he will generally take responsibility. "If it's something
detailed, however, like analyzing a data dump or detailed looking at print material,
I'll generally give it to someone else to do who can do it faster," he
said.

Technology makes all the difference for many people when it
comes to doing their jobs. Those who have mobility problems with their hands
can still communicate with a speech-to-text program, permitting them to speak
into a microphone to direct a computer, not only to type text, but to open and
close windows and perform virtually all functions. Software and hardware have
been designed to answer many needs.

New technology is not always an asset to the handicapped, however.
Chong said the proliferation of more visual screen layouts through the use of
embedded graphics, presentations, and Web pages are complicating communications
for the visually impaired by rapidly outdating old software solutions. Each
individual with limitations must investigate the aids available and determine
what best suits their needs.

The company is researching a centralized accommodations center,
which would feature assistive technology, as well as preventative measures for
problems such as repetitive motion injuries and carpal tunnel syndrome. This
not only would help employees identify the technology best suited for their
needs but would permit the company to take advantage of centralized purchasing
and the resulting pricing benefits.

PERFORMING THE AVERAGE JOB
A QUESTION OF TECHNOLOGY

by Curtis Chong

From the Editor: Curtis Chong is President of the National
Federation of the Blind in Computer Science, a division of the National Federation
of the Blind. The following little essay first appeared on the Internet, where
it has generated a good bit of discussion. Curtis articulates some very real
concerns for everyone interested in seeing that blind people have the opportunity
to compete equally for jobs. This is what he says:

Can the average blind person really perform the average job
in the average place of business, given the state of technology today? I have
been minded to raise this question in light of the many inquiries I receive
from blind people who are interested in obtaining employment and who are then
confronted with the need to use a computer (with unfamiliar or incompatible
software) on the job. I have been forced to confront this issue head-on partly
because of a dramatic lack of technical expertise evident in the field of work
with the blind today. (Well, I shouldn't say "dramatic" actually.
"Inconsistent" might be a better term to use in this context.)

Consider the case of a blind person interested in working as
a customer service representative, an order taker, a collections agent, or a
typist. Inevitably, during the interview questions will come up about the blind
person's ability to use the computer in the office. But before the blind person
can respond with an unequivocal "yes!" he or she must traverse a virtual
mine field of issues: what kind of computers are we talking about here? PC compatibles?
Macintosh computers? DEC (Digital Equipment Corporation) equipment? Sun workstations?

Even if the workstation is a PC-compatible (something which
we as blind people have used quite a bit), one has to consider what operating
system and application software will be used on the job. Will the customer service
representative, secretary, or order taker be required to run DOS, Windows, OS/2,
Windows 95, Windows/NT, or some other new operating system? What specific application
software (the software that does the real work) will be used on the job? Is
that software compatible with the technology the blind person must use to operate
the computer without sighted assistance? Then there is the question of the access
technology (screen reader, if you will) that the blind person will use. Does
such technology exist for the computer that will be used on the job? Even if
it does, will the blind person be able to use the screen reader that he or she
has been trained to use, or will compatibility issues force him or her to switch
to another screen-reading system to be learned from scratch?

In some situations rehabilitation technology specialists have
spent a lot of time and effort customizing screen-reading systems to deal with
complicated screen formats to maximize the blind person's productivity. Although
initially this would appear to have a large payoff (the blind person gets the
job), what will happen when the company decides to change its screen formats
or (even worse) convert everybody to the latest and greatest graphical platform?
Where will the blind person's job be then? Who will perform the technical research
and the customization so that the blind person can continue to work?

In days gone by a blind secretary who could type quickly and
accurately was a highly valued commodity. Today this is simply not the case.
Typing a document in plain text, using only one type font, renders it unattractive
and unappealing to sighted coworkers, who too often believe that a document
is useless unless it contains different fonts used at strategic points throughout
the text. Moreover, the electronic documents produced in the workplace today
are more likely to contain pictures, diagrams, and other non-textual representations
in order to make the material more understandable. The technology we use to
read the screen is not mature enough at this stage to enable us to function
competitively in this context.

Even the blind computer programmer is not unaffected. A growing
number of programming tools are moving away from text-based source code. Some
of them force you to drag objects from one box and drop them into another. Our
text-based access technology does not enable us to perform this kind of work
with speed and efficiency. If the graphical trend in programming continues,
blind programmers may be relegated to working on so-called legacy systems simply
to keep their jobs.

It would seem that the average blind person today, in order
to obtain and retain the average job in the average place of business, must
have access to some sophisticated technological expertise. Where does this expertise
come from? The rehabilitation system? And even if technological expertise is
consistently available in all parts of the country, will this be enough to help
us to compete in the workplace on a basis of equality with our sighted peers?
I for one simply don't know. What I do know is that the technological challenges
we must confront are formidable and real. Unless they are overcome, it will
be even more difficult for the blind to secure employment in the offices of
tomorrow.

[PHOTO/CAPTION: James Salas]

ALBUQUERQUE PUBLIC LIBRARY
MAILS DVS
VIDEOS FREE MATTER

by James L. Salas

From the Editor: Jim Salas is the President of the Albuquerque
Chapter of the National Federation of the Blind of New Mexico. The Governor
recently named him to a seat on the Board of Trustees of the New Mexico School
for the Visually Impaired. In the following article he describes a new public
library program suggested by the NFB. This is what he says:

Many blind people enjoy movies. Some prefer watching them in
a large theater with 300 or so strangers, the big screen, THX sound, and fresh
movie popcorn. Others prefer their own living room, a few friends, the small
screen, a TV speaker, and fresh homemade popcorn. Life in Albuquerque, New Mexico,
has just improved substantially for the stay-at-home crowd. The Albuquerque
Public Library is now mailing its Descriptive Video Service (DVS) videos directly
to blind borrowers, using the Free Matter privilege.

In case you are unfamiliar with video description, though blind
folks can follow the movie dialog just fine, the visuals can be a different
story. We usually rely on someone to provide a play-by- play description of
the setting in which Sean Connery finds himself; the building, bridge, train,
plane, or automobile from which or to which Arnold Schwarzenegger is jumping;
and the outfit Sharon Stone is wearing (or not wearing) as the case may be.
The DVS has solved this problem for the home video aficionado. It adds narrated
descriptions to Hollywood movies on video for blind and low-vision audiences.
DVS describes actions, scene changes, graphics, facial expressions, and other
key visual elements, without interfering with movie dialogue. Nothing more than
a standard VCR and television is required.

Only recently the Albuquerque Public Library began mailing its
DVS collection. Previously borrowers had to travel to the one branch library
where the entire video collection was housed. It was located on the far south
side of Albuquerque. After checking out the video one day, the borrower had
to return the video to that same branch the following day. Unlike books and
other materials, videos had to be checked out from, and returned to, that specific
branch library. Transportation difficulties being what they are, this policy
effectively prevented many blind folks in Albuquerque from enjoying these videos.

That's when the NFB got involved. First we contacted Ms. Cindy
Carhart, South Broadway branch manager, and explained that the current distribution
system was not serving the audience for whom DVS videos were designed. We asked
whether she might be willing to try something new, like mailing the videos to
the borrowers. Success hinged on whether the Free Matter mailing privilege could
be used since paying postage would have made the new distribution program cost-prohibitive.
We asked DVS about this possibility, and the staff provided us with the needed
authorization letter from the Postmaster General. We then gathered information
about hard plastic video mailing containers with reversible address card holders.
Ms. Carhart looked at our proposal and said she was willing to give it a try.

Heres how it works: Interested residents call the library to
register as borrowers and are mailed a library card. Borrowers then call the
South Broadway branch and check out one of the twenty-eight DVS videos in the
collection, which includes titles of interest to both children and adults. The
videos are mailed Free Matter. Borrowers keep the videos for a week before returning
them by mail in the hard plastic video mailer. The program has been in effect
since mid-August and is working well. Both the library itself and the Albuquerque
Chapter of the NFB of New Mexico have plans to add to the library's DVS collection.
What would Siskel and Ebert say about this program? Undoubtedly they would give
it two enthusiastic thumbs up!

NLS Contracts
for Validation of National
Literary Braille Competency Test:

On September 26, 1996, the National Library Service for the
Blind and Physically Handicapped, Library of Congress (NLS) contracted with
Human Resources Research Organization (HumPRO) of Alexandria, Virginia, to carry
out the validation of the Library's recently developed National Literary Braille
Competency Test (NLBCT). The test, released for use in 1994, was developed under
Library of Congress auspices by a committee of experts at the request of major
blind membership organizations in the United States. These groups were concerned
that teachers of blind children and adults be skilled users of Braille themselves.
The test evaluates competency in writing Braille with a slate and stylus and
with a Braille writer, ability to read Braille, and knowledge of Braille code
rules. It is expected that it will be used to verify the Braille skills of teachers.

The director for the validation process will be Dr. Deirdre
Knapp, whose experience includes designing and developing certification testing
programs and job analyses for national organizations.

Dr. Evelyn Rex will be the Braille consultant for the NLBCT
validation project. Dr. Rex is a Braille expert with more than thirty years
of experience as a consultant in the education of visually impaired persons.

The validation process is divided into two parts. In the first
the contractors will analyze the literary Braille tasks performed by teachers
in rehabilitation settings, in residential schools, and in mainstreamed classrooms
and determine the degree to which the NLBCT assesses competency to perform these
tasks. In the second part the contractors will determine the reliability of
the four versions of the NLBCT. The test will be administered to at least two
hundred examinees, and the results will be analyzed to determine reliabilities
and standard errors of measurement and also the difficulty and pass-fail decision
equivalence for each version.

HumPRO will submit recommendations based on the group's analysis.
The validation process is expected to take two years.

Braille Validation Study Time Chart

DATE:
TASK

October 8, 1996 Orientation
(took place)

December 19, 1996 Complete
Part 1 report (identifying tasks) [delayed due to the holidays]

[PHOTO: A couple obviously in wedding clothes stands beside
a Christmas tree in a living room. CAPTION: Julie and Paul Dawson on their wedding
day.]

RECIPES

by Julie Dawson

From the Editor: In honor of Valentine's Day, we are taking
a brief departure from our alphabetical tour of the country for recipes. Julie
and Paul Dawson decided on fairly short notice to get married last year, so
they planned their wedding and prepared all the food for the reception. This
is the story of how they did it and the recipes for what they served:

Our wedding day dawned clear and very cold. We were married
on Little Christmas (Epiphany), the day before the blizzard of 1996. Some of
you may know me formerly as Julie Clark or Cordova; my husband's name is Paul
Dawson.

We met, interestingly enough or, as we believe, miraculously,
through the pen pal section of the Matilda Zeigler magazine. The rest was up
to us and the hard work and commitment we continuously pour into our relationship.
I moved to Farmingdale, New York, on August 30 to join my fianc,. I have experienced
new friends, much snow, lots of trains and buses, my first audio- described
Broadway play, and my first dirty-water hotdog from a Manhattan vendor.

Paul and I were visiting his sister Carole in Connecticut for
Christmas. We were talking about her coming to visit. I wondered aloud if we
could get a wedding planned by January 6, less than two weeks away. We did it,
and it was a lovely ceremony in our home. We took two buses in the pouring rain
to get to our county's courthouse for our marriage license. I called to find
a judge to perform the ceremony in our home. We invited twenty of our closest
friends and family members to share our wedding with us. We baked our own wedding
cake and made baked ziti and rice and peas. We also had mini bagels stuffed
with assorted cold cuts, salads, and cream cheese courtesy of Carole.

We are enclosing the three recipes we used for Monitor readers.
We hope you enjoy making them as much as we did. Doing the wedding together
was an exercise in patience, teamwork, love, frustration, and rewards. We spent
$200 or so. We used our Christmas tree as well as wedding decorations, and Carole
and her friend Tricia took pictures. Another friend Betty, who couldn't be there
due to illness, sent flowers. My parents were recovering from cataract surgeries
but were there in spirit to rejoice with us as well. We were surrounded by the
love and prayers of friends not with us physically but close in our hearts.

DAWSON COVENANT CAKE

Ingredients:

1 pound butter (2 cups), softened

4 cups sugar, sifted

1 teaspoon almond extract

2 teaspoons vanilla extract

6 cups cake flour, sifted

1 teaspoon salt

6 teaspoons baking powder

2 cups milk

12 egg whites

8 cups rich ivory butter cream frosting

Method: Cream butter, gradually adding 21/2 cups sugar
and beating until light and fluffy. Add extracts. Sift together all dry ingredients,
except for the remaining 2 cups of sugar. Add milk alternately with the dry
ingredients in thirds to the creamed mixture. Beat whites slowly until they
form peaks in perfectly clean and dry bowl. Gradually add remaining sugar beating
until stiff peaks form. Gently fold egg whites into the batter. Turn batter
into two 9-by-13-inch pans, which have been lightly floured and greased. Bake
in a preheated 350-degree oven 50 to 55 minutes until cake tester inserted at
center of cake comes out clean. Let cake cool in pans for a few minutes. Turn
cakes out onto wire racks to finish cooling. Ice and decorate.

IVORY BUTTER CREAM FROSTING

Ingredients:

This recipe yields 4 cups frosting

2 cups sugar

1 cup water

10 eggs, 2 whole and 8 whites

1 pound butter, softened

2 tablespoons vanilla extract

Method: Stir sugar and water together
in saucepan over medium heat. Sugar will dissolve and liquid will come to a
boil. Let syrup boil without stirring until temperature reaches 234 to 240 degrees
on candy thermometer, soft ball stage. This can be tested by dropping a small
spoon of syrup into cup of very cold water. A soft ball should form between
fingers. Whisking whole eggs and whites vigorously, pour hot syrup slowly into
the eggs and continue to beat until mixture is cool, light, and fluffy. (To
make frosting more cream-colored, add more yolks and fewer whites.) Cream butter
until very soft, adding butter and vanilla while beating. Then beat into egg
mixture until shiny and firm enough to spread. Frosting will be very glossy
when touched lightly.

RICE AND PEAS (BEANS)

Ingredients:

2 pounds dried red kidney beans

1 pound cooked rice

coconut milk

1 large onion, chopped

3 cloves garlic, minced

2 teaspoons thyme

salt and pepper to taste

Method: Wash beans and cook with
coconut milk in crock pot. Remove meat from coconut and put in blender. Blend
until solid meat is reduced to liquid. Add to beans in crockpot and cover with
additional water. Add lightly sauted vegetables and spices. Cook 10 to 12 hours
on high until beans are tender. In very large pot or two Dutch ovens, combine
beans and rice and heat. Makes enough to serve twenty people with leftovers.

BAKED ZITI

Ingredients:

2 pounds uncooked ziti

2 large jars of Ragu spaghetti sauce

2 8-ounce packages grated cheddar cheese

2 pounds Ricotta cheese

oregano, basil, salt, and pepper

Method: Cook ziti in two Dutch
ovens according to package directions until tender, about 20 minutes, then drain
well. Add enough sauce to moisten. Cook to blend flavors and add spices. Place
ziti in large foil turkey-roasting pan in layers with Ricotta cheese, sauce,
and a bit of cheddar cheese. Repeat, ending with a layer of sauce on top. Sprinkle
most of the cheddar cheese over the top. Some people add a bit more sauce at
the end. You can choose which you prefer. Bake at 350 degrees for forty-five
minutes, until cheese is bubbly.

MONITOR MINIATURES

Corrections:

In the December, 1996, issue we gave an incorrect toll-free
telephone number for credit card orders for Magical Mist Creations's tutorial,
Navigating Netscape. The correct listing is (888) 936-0001. Also, a portion
of the final Monitor Miniature was inadvertently omitted in the print
edition. The text as it should have appeared follows. We regret these errors.

Personal Organizer Software:

We have been asked to carry the following announcement:

Acrontech announces the Personal Organizer, an integrated software
package which is simple to use. It is designed specifically for individuals
who rely on large-print, Braille, or speech devices.

Writing a letter, scheduling appointments, balancing a checkbook,
and accessing an address book to print an envelope are daily tasks which can
be performed quite effectively even by the inexperienced computer user.

The Personal Organizer was recently demonstrated at the World
Blind Union conference in Toronto. The simplicity of the program is what impressed
those who observed the demonstration. One of the visitors commented, "Acrontech
has incorporated the most useful functions of many other programs into one software
package." This program is ideal for use at home, the office, or both.

One of the key features of the Personal Organizer is the unique
screen presentation of menus and entry fields. Information is displayed vertically,
taking up only a portion of the screen, which can be magnified or easily read
by speech- or Braille- output devices. Until now, writing a check on your own
checkbook with speech or Braille was virtually unheard of by computer users.
The Personal Organizer allows you to keep track of all your personal expenses
confidentially and independently. All modules of the Personal Organizer are
based on a simple operational concept; therefore, if you can write a letter,
you can also file data, book appointments, write checks, and print envelopes.
At the low introductory price of $295, Personal Organizer may be the only application
software you need.

John Padilla, President of the NFB of Connecticut, reports that
the new officers in Connecticut are John Padilla, President; Lynn Golden, First
Vice President; Jackie Doucette, Second Vice President; Mark Tardif, Secretary;
and Bruce Woodward, Treasurer. Elected to serve on the Board are Esther Levegnale,
Betty Woodward, Mark Stracks, and John Yark. Michael Freeman, President of the
National Federation of the Blind of Washington, also reports affiliate election
results. The new officers are Michael Freeman, President; Noel Nightingale,
First Vice President; Kaye Kipp, Second Vice President; Rita Szantay, Secretary;
and Gary Mackenstadt, Treasurer. Board members are Ben Prows, Maria Bradford,
Stephanie Yeats, and Mark Noble.

Julie and Brandon, Our Blind Friends is an intriguing activities
book for children, first grade through junior high, written and produced by
the National Federation of the Blind of Idaho. Activities include pictures to
color showing blind children participating in many activities, an introduction
to Braille, Braille puzzles, facts about blind children and Braille, a word
search, a maze, questions and answers, and a story about President Maurer. Several
thousand of these 81/2-by-11, 48-page books have been sold, and a new shipment
has arrived.

You may purchase these activity books one at a time for $4 each
and a shipping charge of $1.50 for one to three books. Or you may purchase twenty-five
or more for $3 each with a shipping charge of $5 for twenty-five books. Write
to National Federation of the Blind of Idaho, 1301 S. Capitol Boulevard, Suite
C, Boise, Idaho 83706.

International Conference:

We have been asked to carry the following announcement:

The tenth World Conference of the International Council for
Education of People with Visual Impairment (ICEVI) will convene in Sao Paulo,
Brazil, August 3 to 9, 1997. ICEVI anticipates that approximately 1,000 professionals,
parents, and consumers from throughout the world will participate in this conference,
whose theme is "Stepping Forward Together: Families and Professionals as
Partners in Achieving Education for All." For conference materials contact
Ivone Costa, Coordinator, Conference Secretariat, ICEVI 10th World Conference,
c/o LARAMARA, Rua Conselheiro Brotero, 338-Barra Funda, 01154-000-Sao Paulo
- SP - Brasil. Phone 55-11-826-3744, fax 55-11-826-9108, e-mail LARAMARA.BRASIL@MANDIC.COM.BR

For Sale:

We have been asked to carry the following announcement:

I am selling a Mountbatten Brailler, which is in new condition.
It includes the connector box, a qwerty keyboard, a parallel cable, and all
manuals in print and Braille. Asking $2,400 or best offer. Contact Chris Foster
by Braille, computer disk, or cassette at 2310 Capitol #10, Sacramento, California
95816, (916) 444-5272 or e-mail, cfoster@csus.edu

Braille and Tape Correspondents Wanted:

Eric Calhoun, a member of the San Fernando Valley Chapter of
the NFB of California, would like to correspond with those interested in blindness
issues. His other interests are sporting events, travel, the outdoors, nature,
music, and meeting new people. He is a Christian and requests chatty letters
only. He can be reached at P.O. Box 1003, Inglewood, California 90308.

Postscript:

Wanda Stebbins, Vice President of the Greater Springfield Chapter
of the NFB of Massachusetts, writes to report that her name was omitted from
the list of newly-elected officers printed in the October issue of the Braille
Monitor.

Perkins Brailler Repairs Available:

We have been asked to carry the following announcement:

The Selective Doctor, Inc., is a repair service for all IBM
typewriters and now Perkins Braille Writers. Located in Baltimore, the service
has done work for the Maryland School for the Blind and a number of other organizations
in Maryland. They now accept Perkins Braillers sent to them from around the
country. They advertise top quality service at yesterday's prices. They also
request a phone call before shipment of Braillers and ask that equipment be
insured in the mails. For more information contact the Selective Doctor, Inc.,
P.O. Box 28432, Baltimore, Maryland 21234, or call (410) 668-1143.

[PHOTO/CAPTION: Nancy Scott]

Poetry Collection Available:

Nancy Scott, one of the leaders of the NFB of Pennsylvania and
an active member of the Writers Division, writes to say that her book, Hearing
the Sunrise, is now available. It is a collection of twenty-eight poems, many
of which have been previously published in national magazines. The book explores
readers' sensory and attitudinal perceptions. Subjects range from the sounds
of solder and snow to the memories evoked by the feel and smell of good wood
to coping with a blind six-year-old and a squirt gun.

Hearing the Sunrise is available in Braille for $4.50 per copy
(shipping free matter) and in standard print for $6 including shipping. To order,
make checks payable to Nancy Scott and mail to 1141 Washington Street, Easton,
Pennsylvania 18042.

Pen Pal Club:

We have been asked to carry the following announcement:

Point to Point (Ponto a Ponto in Portuguese) is a databank made
for people who like to write and receive letters in Braille. It was created
less than two years ago and already has 133 members from nine countries exchanging
letters in Portuguese, Spanish, and English. To participate, send your name,
address, date of birth, profession, areas of interest, and a profile of the
sort of person with whom you want to exchange mail. If you enjoy writing letters
in Braille and making new friends, write to Silvia Valentini, Ponto a Ponto,
Caixa Postal 70538, CEP 05013-990, Sao Paulo, SP, Brazil.

New Chapter:

Barry Feazell, President of the Greater Jacksonville Chapter
of the NFB of Florida, reports the chapter's Saturday, November 16, 1996, birth.
The officers are Barry Feazell, President; John Chmielewski, Vice President;
Carol Feazell, Secretary; and Jerry Roberts, Treasurer. Jim Bowen, James Brock,
and Joe Minichiello are the new Board members. Congratulations to the new chapter.

Elected:

The National Federation of the Blind of Mecklenburg County,
North Carolina, held its annual election on November 16, with the following
results: Mabel Conder, President; Pat Robbins, Vice President; Hazel Staley,
Secretary; and Janis Lynn Stallins, Treasurer. Board members are Katherine Barr,
Laurancene Murphy, and LaVerne Gallant.

The Harvard Business Review Available on Tape:

We have been asked to carry the following announcement:

The Massachusetts Association for the Blind Recording Studio
is pleased to offer The Harvard Business Review on 4-track cassette. The annual
subscription rate is $75. Each bimonthly edition is on two cassettes. Please
contact the MAB Recording Studio at 200 Ivy Street, Brookline, Massachusetts
02146 or call (617) 732-0259 for further information.

Hotline Internet Site for Telecommunications Information:

We have been asked to carry the following announcement:

Information to help consumers better understand the broad new
array of communications products and services is now available on the Internet
from the Tele-Consumer Hotline, the nation's leading source for impartial information
on this topic. The Hotline's English and Spanish publications, as well as a
function which allows consumers to pose questions or complaints to industry
experts or the Hotline's bilingual counselors, can be found at http://www.teleconsumer.org/hotline.
The site features an extensive glossary of telecommunications terms and consumer-friendly
information and advice on a variety of topics such as selecting a long distance
company; unauthorized switching of long distance companies (known as "slamming");
and using calling cards. For people with disabilities the Hotline provides information
on topics such as relay services, assistive technology, equipment-distribution
programs, and special discounts.

All of the publications offered on the Hotline's new homepage
are also available at no charge to consumers who send a self- addressed, stamped
envelope to Tele-Consumer Hotline, P.O. Box 27207, Washington, D.C. 20005.

Used Books, Magazines, Journals, Equipment, and Materials Wanted:

We have been asked to carry the following announcement:

FIMA Institute for Disabled Society in Bangladesh is seeking
donations of used books (any kind), magazines, journals, audio literature, Braille
and print computers, a Braille printing press, a print typewriter, Braille watches,
Braille translator, Perkins Brailler, cassette recorders, CD player and records,
Talking Book recorders and players, talking watches and calculators, white canes,
writing frames, spectacles, and any other materials or equipment useful to disabled
people. The reading and listening formats are video, cassette, moon-type, large
print, Braille books, and letter press. English, Bengali and Hindi languages
are common in the country.

Tom Anderson, Secretary of the Denver Chapter of the National
Federation of the Blind of Colorado, writes with sadness to say that Dorothy
Bitman, a long-time member of the Denver Chapter, passed away on September 9,
1996. She was one of the charter members of the chapter when it was organized
in 1955. She was not one to seek the limelight but was faithful and willing
to do what she could. Every month, without fail, Dorothy brought in her $5 contribution
for the PAC plan. She never missed a chapter meeting unless she was very ill.
She will always be remembered for her faithfulness and her cheerfulness. Dorothy
truly embodied the Federation spirit. She will be missed.

Loraine Stayer recently notified us that her book, Hip Deep
in Trouble and Angling for More, is now available in Braille for $30 from John
Hemphill, Volunteer Braille Services, 215 Sheldon, S.E., Grand Rapids, Michigan
49503. It is also available on tape for $12 from Loraine Stayer, 2704 Beach
Drive, Merrick, New York 11566, (516) 868-8718, fax (516) 868-9076.

Elected:

Kerry Smith, President of the St. Louis Chapter of the NFB of
Missouri, reports that the new chapter officers for 1997 are Kerry Smith, President;
John Ford, Vice President; Susan Ford, Recording Secretary; Anna Schell, Corresponding
Secretary; Thelda Borisch, Treasurer; and Brenda Ford, Board Member-at-Large.

New Baby:

We are pleased to report that on December 27, 1996, at 3:21
p.m., Joshua Chamberlain Ritchart was born to Sheila and William Ritchart, leaders
of the NFB of Indiana. Joshua weighed 7 pounds, 1 ounce at birth and measured
203/4 inches long. Joshua, big brother Lincoln, and their parents are all doing
well.

Accessible Billing Now Available from Sears:

We recently learned that, at the request of one customer, William
Poole of Maryland, Sears Roebuck has now established a method for providing
Brailled bills and usable response materials in the form of a remittance coupon
with a raised line on the back and a raised address on the front for use in
the address window.

The system should be in operation sometime during the first
two quarters of 1997. Interested Sears customers can register for this service
by calling a special response center that Sears has established to handle the
billing needs of blind people at (800) 733-0815. Sears requests that blind customers
use this number for accessible billing inquiries and requests rather than general
Customer Service lines because those representatives may well not have information
about accessible billing. Blind customers may also apply for credit at this
number and arrange to have their Sears bills read by a Customer Service representative
over the telephone until the Braille billing is actually ready. Sears Roebuck
is to be commended for its responsiveness in this matter.

We can only hope that numbers of people will respond by taking
advantage of the service. As Jim Halliday wrote in his paper printed in the
January, 1997, Braille Monitor: "Only a grassroots effort by all
of us can get this sort of access off the ground."

Elected:

The Tidewater Chapter of the NFB of Virginia recently elected
the following: Stewart Prost, President; Robert Southard, First Vice President;
Marian Sanders, Second Vice President; Willard Nichols, Treasurer; and David
Collins, Secretary. Board members are Ella Herbert and Charles King.

Job Placement Conference:

We have been asked to carry the following announcement:

The Rehabilitation Research and Training Center on Blindness
and Low Vision at Mississippi State University will be conducting a national
conference in Tampa, Florida, from April 2 to 4, 1997, entitled "Job Placement
for the 21st Century." Featured speakers are Dr. Karen Wolffe, Mr. Jerry
Miller, Dr. Craig Colvin, Dr. Susan Kelley, and Mr. Robert Kelly. The registration
deadline is March 15. The conference site is Tampa Airport Hilton at MetroCenter,
2225 Lois Avenue, Tampa, Florida, (813) 877-6688. Participants should make their
own reservations. Note that you are attending the Mississippi State Conference.
Registration fee is $75, which includes breakfast on April 3 and 4. For more
information contact Ms. Tara Laney at (601) 325-2001.

Nutrition Magazine Survey:

Teresa Wakefield, one of the leaders of the Black Hawk County
Chapter of the NFB of Iowa, writes as follows:

I am conducting a survey to see how much interest there is in
a nutritional magazine in Braille and/or on cassette. There is a possibility
of Brailling an already-existing magazine on nutrition, and, if this project
is received favorably, there is a chance of expanding into other areas. Please
write in Braille or on cassette and tell us what you would be interested in
and what other subjects or magazines you would like to see covered. We would
have to charge subscription fees for these magazines. Send your comments to
Teresa Wakefield, 722 Denver Street, Waterloo, Iowa 50702.

Braille Books For Young Readers:

Geoffrey Bull of Braille International, Inc., has just sent
us the following announcement:

In an effort to encourage Braille literacy among young readers,
this year Braille International is launching a Braille series for young readers.
Goosebumps, the most popular series ever produced for young readers, is our
choice for the first series we are making available in Braille. With a generous
donation and in anticipation of an encouraging response to our advertisements,
we are offering each Goosebumps title at the same price as the print edition,
$4.95 per copy. For those committing to the first twelve issues, the annual
subscription will be $50.

If this series is successful, we will be producing others with
Babysitter's Club high on our list. If you are a young Braille reader or the
parent or friend of a child who reads Braille, take a moment to forward a payment
together with the 21st Century." Featured speakers are Dr. Karen Wolffe,
Mr. Jerry Miller, Dr. Craig Colvin, Dr. Susan Kelley, and Mr. Robert Kelly.
The registration deadline is March 15. The conference site is Tampa Airport
Hilton at MetroCenter, 2225 Lois Avenue, Tampa, Florida, (813) 877-6688. Participants
should make their own reservations. Note that you are attending the Mississippi
State Conference. Registration fee is $75, which includes breakfast on April
3 and 4. For more information contact Ms. Tara Laney at (601) 325-2001.

Nutrition Magazine Survey:

Teresa Wakefield, one of the leaders of the Black Hawk County
Chapter of the NFB of Iowa, writes as follows: I am conducting a survey to see
how much interest there is in a nutritional magazine in Braille and/or on cassette.

There is a possibility of Brailling an already-existing magazine
on nutrition, and, if this project is received favorably, there is a chance
of expanding into other areas. Please write in Braille or on cassette and tell
us what you would be interested in and what other subjects or magazines you
would like to see covered. We would have to charge subscription fees for these
magazines. Send your comments to Teresa Wakefield, 722 Denver Street, Waterloo,
Iowa 50702.

Braille Books For Young Readers:

Geoffrey Bull of Braille International, Inc., has just sent
us the following announcement:

In an effort to encourage Braille literacy among young readers,
this year Braille International is launching a Braille series for young readers.
Goosebumps, the most popular series ever produced for young readers, is our
choice for the first series we are making available in Braille. With a generous
donation and in anticipation of an encouraging response to our advertisements,
we are offering each Goosebumps title at the same price as the print edition,
$4.95 per copy. For those committing to the first twelve issues, the annual
subscription will be $50.

If this series is successful, we will be producing others with
Babysitter's Club high on our list. If you are a young Braille reader or the
parent or friend of a child who reads Braille, take a moment to forward a payment
together with the name and address of the intended recipient. Send your orders
to Braille International, Inc., 3290 S.E. Slater Street, Stuart, Florida 34997,
(800) 336-3142. Cash, checks, and major credit cards are accepted.